not real at all

arabnight · Post by **arabnight** » 22 Oct 2005, 20:59

Peter Ferrell wrote:Seriously, think about it though. No matter how good a street racer you are; no matter how fast your car is; no matter how quick your reaction times are, police officers are trained how to end pursuits, both peacefully (boxing you in), and violently (ramming you). They probably are more skilled at pursuits, than anyone else. So, not adding damage to NFSMW simply makes sense: It makes the game a little easier, and more fun. If you're really serious about damage though, concentrate on keeping your car free of scratches - that should be hard enough. Besides, who really wants to pull in to their garage, with your expensive Porsche's door crushed, spolier hanging off, and oil leaking? And furthermore, who wants to pay to fix it?

so very true and i juiced should never be brought up in these forms again cause thats the worset game i touched in my life....and ^_^ u would be able to knock down those pretty sweet doughnuts down if ur car takes damage like that

Executor 01 · Post by **Executor 01** » 22 Oct 2005, 21:00

i want the demo but how do i get it?

the xbl magazine, gamestop, gamers or what?

USE THE EDIT button!

^Sparco^ · Post by **^Sparco^** » 22 Oct 2005, 21:01

Executor 01 wrote:i want the demo but how do i get it?

By STFU and waiting 2 weeks.

baumaxx1 · Post by **baumaxx1** » 23 Oct 2005, 07:30

This game was made for fun...
Who cares if it's realistic or not.
And anyway, In juiced it's a pain driving with damage.
I think underground2 is superior to any other racing game apart from GT or Forza

Executor 01 · Post by **Executor 01** » 23 Oct 2005, 21:45

i agree with baumaxx1

^Sparco^ · Post by **^Sparco^** » 23 Oct 2005, 23:09

I don't agree with baumaxx1

Total unrealistic game = Hilarious = Frustrating.
Semirealistic game = good
Total realistic game = Difficult = Boring

Peter Ferrell · Post by **Peter Ferrell** » 30 Oct 2005, 16:18

Personally, I think Underground 1 was much better than UG 2 though, except for the free roam... It was fun at the beginning (UG 2) but after having to drive around for an hour trying to find some stupid shop/race, it got kind of boring... I would like it, if in MW, they gave you an option of either driving to the shops/races, or selecting off of a menu, as in UG 1.

The Flying Dragon · Post by **The Flying Dragon** » 02 Nov 2005, 15:03

I agree...I got bored driving around to races..its tedius and long...I duno i like in SRS where you can just jump to any race and save time, and WHEN i feel like it i will explore (which is never) lol...i don't like damage beacuse it runs my perfect car, and i hate paying for damages, its frustrating how a little bump will cost u a lot jus tto repair it, I like how it is now, Im just disappointed how Ferrarri is not in MW... =( my fav exotic brand..sighs.

Peter Ferrell · Post by **Peter Ferrell** » 08 Nov 2005, 00:05

Though I don't like the damage in some games, it does improve your reflexes, decision-making, and ultimately make you a better driver.

MaXGTS · Post by **MaXGTS** » 12 Nov 2005, 03:37

No cockpit graphics. No vehicle damage. Sluggish physics. EA only makes mediocre arcade racers. Always have, always will.

RavenGT · Post by **RavenGT** » 12 Nov 2005, 04:03

First of all, the current engine cannot handle fully modeled cockpits. Hell, it's already raping our computers even without modeled cockpits.

Secondly, driving physics are completely fine for an arcade racer. Hell, if I had to be honest I'd vote Burnout for the worst driving physics.

The reason why NFS games aren't as revolutionary anymore is simply because of the fact that they got a little lazy, and started massively recycling in-game materials, and even concepts. Meaning, it's getting less and less original every game. Let's be honest guys, we've seen everything already. Exotics, tuners, free-roam city, pursuit, ranking system, N2O, weather, the horrid EA trax...

James31278 · Post by **James31278** » 12 Nov 2005, 05:02

^Sparco^ wrote:
James31278 wrote:
Drewb99 wrote:...with damage. EA's too cheap to spend time on a good damage system then see if their liscencers will allow it.
Past Need For Speed games DO have damage. HP2 had cosmetic damage.
Yeah, you crashed your car 50 times @ 200kph and you got a 5% damaged bumper

As Stig said, if there was damage, the player would be caught always!

As it happens in real life, the cops always win!

The crooks usually lose because they are flippin idiots. Professionals dont leave a trail a mile long.

Freeman · Post by **Freeman** » 12 Nov 2005, 09:17

okai fisrt after playing the demo if your car had damge you won't have any posibilite completing the chalenges and your car gets i bit damaged but nothing too serios but hey it's better then nothing no?

Abrams · Post by **Abrams** » 12 Nov 2005, 12:08

Like Stig already said, car manufacturers arent allowing their car to be damaged.
Simply due to the fact that you cant model real life damage model. I.e. if car has some special damage suspending feature in real-life you wont be able to model it as well. So manufacturers simply dont want it.

MaXGTS · Post by **MaXGTS** » 13 Nov 2005, 17:13

RavenGT wrote:First of all, the current engine cannot handle fully modeled cockpits. Hell, it's already raping our computers even without modeled cockpits.

Simbin's GT Legends has fully modeled cockpits and used DirectX9 effects such as High Dynamic Range. It runs just fine on a good PC. The only reason the NFS series doesn't have cockpits is because it would increase development time significantly and also increase development costs. The main reason we don't get cockpits in NFS is because EA is money hungry, greedy machine and has absolutely no interest in the arcade racing or sim racing community, and no interest in making a really good racing game.

Abrams · Post by **Abrams** » 13 Nov 2005, 17:35

You forgot to add:

'That will run only on 3.0+ High-End machines'

^Sparco^ · Post by **^Sparco^** » 13 Nov 2005, 18:15

Yeah.

Seen the intro movie quality? The M3 is shocking

I think it's possible to make a game with those graphics, but we would need year 2010 machines to run them smoothly...

Peter Ferrell · Post by **Peter Ferrell** » 15 Nov 2005, 03:00

MaXGTS wrote:
RavenGT wrote:First of all, the current engine cannot handle fully modeled cockpits. Hell, it's already raping our computers even without modeled cockpits.
Simbin's GT Legends has fully modeled cockpits and used DirectX9 effects such as High Dynamic Range. It runs just fine on a good PC. The only reason the NFS series doesn't have cockpits is because it would increase development time significantly and also increase development costs. The main reason we don't get cockpits in NFS is because EA is money hungry, greedy machine and has absolutely no interest in the arcade racing or sim racing community, and no interest in making a really good racing game.

Dude, shall I remind you that NFSUG 1 sold more copies than any other game that year? May I remind you that previous NFS games (NFS 3 HP) have have cockpit views...

RavenGT · Post by **RavenGT** » 15 Nov 2005, 03:19

Peter Ferrell wrote:
MaXGTS wrote:
RavenGT wrote:First of all, the current engine cannot handle fully modeled cockpits. Hell, it's already raping our computers even without modeled cockpits.
Simbin's GT Legends has fully modeled cockpits and used DirectX9 effects such as High Dynamic Range. It runs just fine on a good PC. The only reason the NFS series doesn't have cockpits is because it would increase development time significantly and also increase development costs. The main reason we don't get cockpits in NFS is because EA is money hungry, greedy machine and has absolutely no interest in the arcade racing or sim racing community, and no interest in making a really good racing game.
Dude, shall I remind you that NFSUG 1 sold more copies than any other game that year? May I remind you that previous NFS games (NFS 3 HP) have have cockpit views...

...yeah, 2D photo cockpits :/ Also, I know other games seem to have more visual features yada yada. But have any of you realize that (I think) from HP2, NFSU, NFSU2 and NFSMW all use the same base game engine. As they started to add more detail such as more detailed textures, more complex reflections & shaders, and higher polycount, the performance across the games started to take a huge hit after another. That means that EA didn't bother to optimize the engine that much to make it run comfortably for us with the new visuals.
But you there, are talking about other games that utilize different graphic engines. Different graphic engines can handle different things, differently. Look at the Source engine compared to the Doom engine. Half-Life 2 has to render heck alot of textures and detailed props, and it still ends up running so much damn faster than Doom 3, which is all mostly indoor enviroments.
I rest my case

Peter Ferrell · Post by **Peter Ferrell** » 15 Nov 2005, 03:47

I kind of see where you are going with this, but I don't think that the 10 million people who bought UG's 1 and 2 really minded that much... When it comes to the end, a racing game is still about the racing. Everything else besides race quality should come second. So if your game doesn't run as fast with all the graphics options turned up, then turn them off, and race.