View Full Version : My first impressions

21st June 2002, 02:43 AM
So far, I'm liking it. It's not absolutely perfect, but it's not really horrible either.
I love the new tracks, new weapons, and especially the graphics. The biggest problem with it is the physics engine. It's not a horrible physics engine by any means, it's just that the ships seem fixed at a certain height above the track. Pitching up an down also doesn't feel right. But then, imagine trying to do a loop with the wipeout 3 engine...
As for the best race records issue, I don't care a whole lot about it. Gran Turismo 3 didn't even have race records!
I also like how you have to unlock just about everything, including weapons.
Also, some of you have been complaining about the difficulty and the forgiving walls. True, you almost never come to a stop on walls, but they slow you down pretty good, and they also murder your sheilds. I've been having troubles actually completing races at all (getting 2 or 3 quakes in a row doesn't help either)! and then there's the challenges! boy, some of those are TOUGH!

21st June 2002, 03:37 PM
You know, I think the main problem with the physics engine is that the craft don't have enough inertia. It feels like the speed boosts don't have long enough lasting effects, as in wipeout 3/XL. for example, in XL when you did a turbo boost, you would keep going fast until you hit brakes or a wall, or you just gradually slowed down. the inertialessness also explains for the non-floaty feel of the ships. the A-G engines of course can only levitate them at certain altitude, and being inertialess, they have no reason to leave that altitute, except when jumping or landing. Do you follow that? But then, imagine trying to do loops with too much inertia...

But pitching still doesn't feel quite right.

21st June 2002, 06:56 PM
The quakes will thin out as you unlock more weapons - and it helps the game immensely. As NTSC owners, think how things are for us PAL owners - the game was weighted toward racing instead of weapons for the NTSC version, so if you think it's bad for you then it's hellish for PAL pilots.

The craft do have a constrained physics model, too - not a true model at any rate. To quote lead artist, Garvan Corbett "If we had used the old physics model, the craft would have been flying off of the track into the scenery. We had to make them stick to the track in certain places to avoid that."

Apparently it was also forgotten that the AG powers of the craft had nothing to do with the track. Somewhere along the line the decision was made that it was the track which was responsble for the levitation of the craft. This is why the physics go a bit slidey when you venture off track in the freeform areas.

There are two reasons why I think this sucks. One, it's a total departure from the history of the series. Two, it only affects the human controlled craft - play Alca Vexus 3 reverse and you'll see what I mean. When you have to do the left hander off of the water, the AI craft take it as if they are on rails - the human craft cannot. This is why I refuse to play that track, because it shows the flaws up in the game design.

Sad but true, folks :evil:

21st June 2002, 09:21 PM
ON any track that you need to use brakes to not hit the walls, it is faster(at least once everything is upgraded) to not use the brakes at all than to do perfect turns. This is complete Bulls###. How can a tester not notice this!! This is the only reason I am not playing it anymore. The other stuff infox mentioned is bad but doesn't completely kill the game for me. Also of note, when you go off jumps, changing your pitch up or down almost doesn't affect where you are going to land, this is ridiculous. To be honest I think the physics are like this because old wipeout physics wouldn't work with zone mode, so the regular racing got screwed so zone mode would work right. Sorry, Rant.

22nd June 2002, 12:46 AM
So am I the only person that like the freeforms?
as for the wall scraping, I don't have everything upgraded yet, so I can't talk about that. But as of now I HAVE to avoid walls or I can't make it through a race!
and couldn't they have made the crafts stick without taking away the inertia with respect to speed?

22nd June 2002, 02:56 AM
To quote lead artist, Garvan Corbett "If we had used the old physics model, the craft would have been flying off of the track into the scenery. We had to make them stick to the track in certain places to avoid that."
Then why am I flying off the track into the scenery? Seriously, this happens at least once every few races. I'll be moving along, and suddenly I blast through the wall like a blur and sail out into the wild blue. Is this a feature of a weapon that I'm not aware of? It seems like it happens only on certain tracks, and I haven't unlocked any of the supers yet.

As for not slowing down with scraping, it doesn't bother me at all. I can see where Zoolander is coming from, but when I think about it, how is that worse that turbo scraping?

So am I the only person that like the freeforms?
Yes... Yes you are. :lol: After arguing the point with him, I am 100% behind infox on this one. It's not the different terrain, the dust, or even the altered physics, but when I hit a tree at 2000kph, that tree had better go down. It's irritating as hell. What's even worse, are the areas where there's a big flat obstacle in the middle of the road that's clearly designed to trap the player. Splitting the road is cool, setting up traps is not.

29th August 2002, 07:58 PM
ON any track that you need to use brakes to not hit the walls, it is faster(at least once everything is upgraded) to not use the brakes at all than to do perfect turns. This is complete Bulls###. How can a tester not notice this!! This is the only reason I am not playing it anymore.

OK i have read this, and seen a couple of other people mention it, but i am not totally convinced yet, i want proof. From my experience playing Fusion, (i am now at 85% total complete), touching the walls DOES slow you down slightly (although obviously nowhere near as much as previous games).

I have to say Fusion is cool, a lot of people here seem to bash it, but one thing i think you should remember is this is the FIFTH wipeout game.

They have to do something NEW, they couldnt just make Wipeout 3 with Better Graphics, which is what some of you seem to have wanted and been expecting.

Maybe its because i have the NTSC version, it seems to be the best version in terms of balance etc(comments?). Maybe its just the old "incredibly high expectations" problem.

Comments on this and also my original point about PROOF for the walls VS airbrakes question awaited...

EDIT: i have just read some of the older threads and it looks like most of you have already talked about some of this stuff so i guess its old ground for you, sorry for repeating somewhat previous posts/threads.

30th August 2002, 12:11 AM
I will offer no proof, but it is the case. especially if you turbo through a turn(blasting into the wall) it is much faster than turboing after a perfect turn. I didn't need a perfect game, but would liked to have the ship slow down a decent margin(same style though). maybe like xg3 or f-zerox(but certainly don't make the game play like these games). If this had been implemented, I would give the game a much higher score and would still play it today(A- or B+). NO pitch contol is just plain bullshit, and you can't adjust where you land when in the air as much as before, but I could have gotten over that with a game that required skill(besides zone). By the way pitch control I would bet my entire paycheck on was taken out to put zone mode in. Zone mode is not worth losing arcade races. NO arcade racing records and only one lap time trials for records rounds out the crap. I do like the new scraping technique, but it should be far less rewarding. My proof for you will have to be to look at my wo3 records, I played each game in the series to get the best time I could get by way of achieving 5 perfect laps if possible. When I finally got to fusion race records is when I discovered this horrible flaw. I liked the game before that(check out my old review). They also messed with the way the brakes work. It should have not slowed you down so much when upgraded, but help you get around the corner faster, similar to the old games

30th August 2002, 01:08 AM
but you know, air brakes are pretty damn important in Zone Mode...

30th August 2002, 06:26 PM
it should be called fusion without the wipeout bit thats how it plays ok i dont want a better carbon copy of the other games in the series but some carry over would be nice after all we are all here because we happen to like the way the games played the new one just doesnt play the same or as well for that matter and i think sales have shown that to be the case i reckon sony will be back soon with a more familier game or scrap the whole idea altogether which would be a real shame

30th August 2002, 11:24 PM
In zone mode the airbrakes work perfectly, you actually can use them and keep most of your speed and go around the corner perfectly. If this was like this in the regular game, it would only have to slow down a little more on the turns, although, about 30% more would be desireable

31st August 2002, 01:59 AM
zone mode airbrakes are not airbrakes at all. they do not slow you down in the least bit, they only allow you drift. it sort of makes sense for that mode, i suppose.

31st August 2002, 11:45 PM
If you hold on the brakes at high zone modes(100+) they will slow you down somewhat, although not as much as say xl. but in xl they allow you to tap and get around corners fast, kinda like zone mode. All I really meant by that is that if the brakes were like zone mode, perfect turns would be faster(although not by much, but enough)

1st September 2002, 07:31 AM
Well, one of the reasons I loved wipeout so much was its flawless airbrake-system unseen in any other racing game. It introduces a whole different technique of playing with a good learning curve. So, I agree with Zoolander and many other critics here that this is really one of the things that makes Fusion just another racing game, and not a *true* wipeout title.

I personally wouldn't have wanted wip3out "with better graphics". After all, I often critically thought in the beginning that wip3out was simply 2097 with different tracks and other craft - the control system remained largely the same - and hoped that Fusion would really be a daring departure from the ancient games. However, it's not innovative where it should have been, and the things they've done away with were often essential to the spirit of the game (physics anyone?). Well. Too bad.


1st September 2002, 09:17 AM
talking about the spirit of the game.....

fusion doesnt "feel" as underground as say 2097....... 2097 really felt like wipeout, a new type of racing, that nobody knew about. :) fusion doesnt have that.....

1st September 2002, 02:43 PM
If you are doing a vey different kind of game don't put the series name on it. Otherwise people will think that the only thing you're doing is trying to increase sales by attracting long standing fans.

IMO game series must stick to their original concept with the unavoidable evolution. Different games, same names isn't the way. If the original idea is not to be a best-seller anymore I prefer to see a series die than it being converted into something that has no relationship with what it was and represented.

A bit difficult to express that in English, I don't know if I explained that well enough. :(


1st September 2002, 11:31 PM
xEik, your English was quite clear; i understand, and i agree. i've only experienced Fusion through videos and a wealth of descriptions by others, but this gives a clear picture of a game that is not Wipeout. if a new version of wipeout is required, it should have been some sort of evolution of Wip3out that included more complex lightsourcing, optional weather effects, trackside animation, more detailed textures, perhaps an additional mode, and of course all new circuits, etc. but the basic game structure [with no upgrades, for example] should be retained, and including at least two stable, standardised modes for record-keeping that allow worldwide competition between the pilots. in my opinion, the physics engine is nearly ideal in 2097 and WO3, and requires only subtle tweaking.

an extra i would like to see would be more of the textureless prototype tracks

2nd September 2002, 12:04 AM
an extra i would like to see would be more of the textureless prototype tracks

those would be really gorgeous with ps2 graphics. does anyone know how fusion sold/ is selling in europe and north america (seperately)? i just wonder if we'll ever see another WO and if we do, i dont know how likely they are to revert to the old style of gameplay, unfortunately...