Much like Sebastian Vettel’s unchallenged run of victories, Codemasters’ F1 series is beginning to take it easy through a lack of competition. Despite offering an array of legendary drivers from across the 1980s and ‘90s, this year’s progress isn’t loaded with enough fuel to capture the attention of those who think Toro Rosso and Eau Rouge are two selections from Dulux’s upcoming Autumn range.

While the franchise doesn’t need a significant pit-stop to impress, technical upgrades will fail to attract the uninitiated. F1 2012’s brutal handling has received a slight tweak to allow tighter overtakes and extra leeway when battling against spins, but it takes plenty of frustration and dedication to ensure you finish races without a 30 second penalty, or indeed, finish the race at all.

Classic cars highlight how restricted F1 has become, as without the hassle of systems such as KERS and DRS, raw driver skill becomes most important. Romping through Surtees at Brands Hatch in Nigel Mansell’s classic Williams setup feels different to the pillow-protected vehicles of today, and as if something could go dangerously wrong at any moment.

Assists help less experienced players, including racing lines, automatic braking and chatter from your crew. Last year’s rewind feature is back and eliminates the sting of a last-minute crash at Monza’s Parabolica, and the option to save your race at any time helps cut frustration down.

This year’s presentation is a true high for the series, as everything from the shiniest cockpit to a Tron-inspired soundtrack helps replicate the drama of a Sky Sports broadcast. Career mode is less slick — and forces you into taking a mind-numbingly boring Young Drivers test — but an array of scenario-based challenges bolsters the usual Time Attack, Grand Prix and online options.

F1 2013 is the franchise’s most complete, versatile and thoughtful iteration yet. Fans of the sport will lap up what is an extremely rewarding product. For everyone else, Codemasters’ lone residency atop the podium ensures the upgrade over last year’s game is minimal, especially if you don’t know the difference between Gerhard Berger and the Nurburgring’s fast-food stand.

Version Tested: Xbox 360. Played for 11 hours.

8 / 10

  • Packed with content to play through.
  • Excellent presentation and soundtrack.
  • Minimal changes gives casual players have little reason to buy.
  • Career mode needs a revamp.

New stuff to check out

13 Comments

To add your comment, please login or register

Highest Rated Comment

TheLastProphet's Avatar

TheLastProphet

This is by far the worst game review I have ever read.

It's a review of a driving game which contains one solitary sentence about how the cars handle.

No mention is made of the damage model, suspension/downforce physics etc whatsoever.

There is no mention of the framerate the game runs at - something very important to racing game fans.

There is no mention of the weather effects and if they have improved from previous iterations of the game.

The reviewer states the series needs some competition to force it to improve - something which is impossible as Codemasters have the exclusive licence to produce F1 games.

One of the biggest criticisms of the Codemasters F1 games is that they are always full of bugs and glitches at launch, something which is not mentioned or addressed at all.

Another major criticism is the series has never allowed players to race as their favourite F1 driver in the career mode - and you are forced to create a new driver starting his career in the weakest teams, making the first couple of seasons painful to play. Again whether or not this has been addressed is not even mentioned.

Nothing at all is mentioned about the multiplayer modes - how many players in a race, options to turn collisions off, modes available, lag, lobby system, etc - no mention of anything to do with the multiplayer/online side to game whatsoever. Why? How can someone review a racing game without even mentioning the multiplayer modes?

I understand that the reviewer feels that little has changed from F1 2012, but F1 2013 (and any game for that matter) still deserves a more thorough and professional review than this, which frankly reads like it was written on the back of a cigarette packet while waiting for a bus - written by someone who is clearly not a fan of F1 games or knowledgeable of racing games in general.
Posted 18:14 on 30 September 2013

User Comments

Mintyrebel's Avatar

Mintyrebel@ Karlius

Could not agree more. I was seriously shocked when Matt said what he said and even more shocked nobody said anything about it. Although with the almighty censoring dictator now hanging above us I suppose we have to be careful about what we say.
Posted 11:44 on 02 October 2013
Karlius's Avatar

Karlius

Re Read the review for the 10th time today.

I have changed my opinion it's not that bad a review and for the non F1 fan (But surely F1 fans are going to be buying this game) it is pretty fluid and covers things off.

What lets it down is there is no supporting literature as with the other big releases. Car Dynamics and handling needs an in depth analysis released alongside the review.

PS. Noted there is a typo on the pro's and cons.
Posted 11:42 on 02 October 2013
Karlius's Avatar

Karlius

This is the first time I've been let down by one of these 300 word reviews. Why as it's a specialist game it needs in depth analysis as pointed out by TheLastProphet. Been here since the start and think this is probably the weakest review I have ever read on the site and I don't hold the author at fault as the constraints are clear. There is simply too much to cover in the allocated space.

If there was more of an in depth analysis at the bottom as with other reviews it would have been something and aided the review but there isn't. It's a damn shame and has left me wanting more so I'm off elsewhere to find out those answers. Surely that isn't the goal.

I guess I now fully understand peoples gripes with the format.

As for AltaranGate the guy has been here for a very long time and has been a pillar of this community. Others have come and gone but he remained propping it up. I even remember him sending in some hideous insect treats from japan etc for the former, former podcast punishments at his own expense. So I don't think the original complaint was out of place as his opinion was in the interest of the site. I think the response was brushed aside too quickly from a member of staff who hasn't in all honesty been here that long and maybe doesn't understand the community spirit here. Alta's retort was in my opinion a little strong as I think Mr. Lee's has done a lot for the site in his short tenure but I can understand Altaranga's frustration as he appeared to be belittled, reacted to that frustration and that is how most humans work. Glad he has stayed about as he is still a pillar of the community.
Posted 10:58 on 01 October 2013
dav2612's Avatar

dav2612

I've got no issue with the small reviews as I only ever read the summary paragraph at the end... I much prefer watching footage. But I do hope it changes to put an end to all the slating of the format after each and every review.
Posted 09:55 on 01 October 2013
pblive's Avatar

pblive@ Mintyrebel

In that case, why not just double the number of click baiting headlines and shorten reviews to 3 words to save time?

Job done.

But then that wouldn't be fair to those reviewers who want to get their thoughts across and I honestly believe 300 words is not enough to do the same, either. I don't mind shorter reviews, just as long as they are not short for the sake of it. If you've said all you are going to say then stop, by all means, but if you've got to the end of a word limit and still have more detail to add then there's something wrong with the system.
Posted 09:23 on 01 October 2013
Mintyrebel's Avatar

Mintyrebel@ pblive

I think the main issue is they want to do something different because oftentimes different = more clicks = more ad revenue and, based on the recent article about visitor numbers, it seems to be working. That doesn't mean I like the reviews, I think everybody here knows I don't, but looking at it from a VG side if it brings them more hits why would they listen to us and change it?
Posted 07:53 on 01 October 2013
Mintyrebel's Avatar

Mintyrebel@ Slender_Man_co

I don't like negativity and hate although, if I recall correctly, his original post was in no way insulting. That being said I work in a corner shop, if a customer came up to me and rudely suggested that I change the way the milk fridge looked, do you think I could just tell him to go find another shop? I think my boss might get a bit annoyed over that. What I should do is politely explain why the milk fridge is that way and be as nice as possible to the customer until he buys his milk.

That being said I see your point, the second post was probably a little too far but then if I'd been told to leave the forums that I'd been on longer than most of the staff I'd probably be a bit annoyed too :P
Posted 07:51 on 01 October 2013
pblive's Avatar

pblive

I believe it's just that the reviewers find it difficult to be chained to a rather strange convention that I've only ever seen in such high acclaimed editorial establishments like The Sun or The Daily Mail.

Why the limit? Surely just shortening the reviews without an arbitrary limit is a better solution? There's being concise and then there's being constrained.

I can't speak for Altaranga, but I feel strongly about this because I've been on this site long enough to build some sort of relationship with it (and I'm not even among those who've been here since the very early days). It's not about change, sites need that, it's about the logic of any changes and whether they benefit the site.
Posted 22:35 on 30 September 2013
Slender_Man_co's Avatar

Slender_Man_co@ Mintyrebel

When that suggestion was made the opinion he was expressing was that the staff of this site were boring and talentless. So I think it is reasonable to suggest at that point that another site might suit him better.

It's altaranga's right to come on here and post his sarcastic, aggressive and hyperbolic opinions. It's also my right to think he is a rude twat who isn't half as good a writer as he thinks he is.

Minty, you and the other guys who have been around a while and prefer the old direction at least make arguments that don't rely on petty insults directed at staff members who work very hard on the content of this site. That feedback at least can be taken on board, even if they continue to go in the direction they believe in. altaranga's points are presented with an unnecessary amount of venom that puts people offside and doesn't contribute in a positive way.

These are my opinions and I have really held myself back so far and I will go back to doing so after this post as I really don't like negativity and hate.
Posted 22:19 on 30 September 2013
Mintyrebel's Avatar

Mintyrebel@ altaranga

inb4 your told not to use the forums again by staff because you stated your opinion...
Posted 19:57 on 30 September 2013
altaranga's Avatar

altaranga@ TheLastProphet

Thank-you for putting the time and effort into writing this.

Normally I'd just write something like "Your 300 word reviews suck". I don't bother explaining why because I don't think anyone at VG really cares. Perhaps the question should be Why do I care? I'm not really sure. What I do know is that I now spare myself the embarrassment of having to read this dross by seeking my Review opinions from other sites.
Posted 19:51 on 30 September 2013
yellowsapphire's Avatar

yellowsapphire

Whilst there are some who aren't fans of F1 who might pick this up, the trailers and promo give the impression they aren't marketing this game towards those to whom Eau Rouge sounds more like a perfume than the stuff of legend. (Which I think renders some of this review rather moot.)
Posted 18:37 on 30 September 2013
TheLastProphet's Avatar

TheLastProphet

This is by far the worst game review I have ever read.

It's a review of a driving game which contains one solitary sentence about how the cars handle.

No mention is made of the damage model, suspension/downforce physics etc whatsoever.

There is no mention of the framerate the game runs at - something very important to racing game fans.

There is no mention of the weather effects and if they have improved from previous iterations of the game.

The reviewer states the series needs some competition to force it to improve - something which is impossible as Codemasters have the exclusive licence to produce F1 games.

One of the biggest criticisms of the Codemasters F1 games is that they are always full of bugs and glitches at launch, something which is not mentioned or addressed at all.

Another major criticism is the series has never allowed players to race as their favourite F1 driver in the career mode - and you are forced to create a new driver starting his career in the weakest teams, making the first couple of seasons painful to play. Again whether or not this has been addressed is not even mentioned.

Nothing at all is mentioned about the multiplayer modes - how many players in a race, options to turn collisions off, modes available, lag, lobby system, etc - no mention of anything to do with the multiplayer/online side to game whatsoever. Why? How can someone review a racing game without even mentioning the multiplayer modes?

I understand that the reviewer feels that little has changed from F1 2012, but F1 2013 (and any game for that matter) still deserves a more thorough and professional review than this, which frankly reads like it was written on the back of a cigarette packet while waiting for a bus - written by someone who is clearly not a fan of F1 games or knowledgeable of racing games in general.
Posted 18:14 on 30 September 2013

Game Stats

F1 2013
8
Out of 10
F1 2013
  • Packed with content to play through.
  • Excellent presentation and soundtrack.
  • Minimal changes gives casual players have little reason to buy.
  • Career mode needs a revamp.
Agree? Disagree? Get Involved!
Release Date: 04/10/2013
Platforms: Xbox 360 , PS3 , PC
Developer: Codemasters
Publisher: Codemasters
Genre: Racing
Rating: TBC
Site Rank: 2 4
View Full Site