Need for the Speed the Run Difficult Glitch?


Recommended Posts

I've just recently started Need for the Speed The Run and I'm curious if anyone else has had this problem. I've played many NFS games in the past and I've never had such difficulty (even under easy) passing cars. It seems in this game you have to really try really hard (to the point your forgetting its a game). The very first race took 9 attempts on two different cars under Normal/Easy difficulty. It took me nearly 4 minutes of the course just to get past the first racer even racing at max speeds and most of the time I'm being passed near the end of the race. Feels like Mario Kart or previous NFS titles only alot worse with the "auto magical catch up" like most racing games have.

I was wondering if anyone else had this type of problem?

Well, like you, I have also played a variety of NFS games, excluding Shifts.

I, currently, am playing it on Medium, I think, and its pretty difficult.

Compared to last year' Hot Pursuit, which was quite a great one, this game isn't just up there with the good ones.

Sure the FrostBite 2 engine is good and all, but its just simply not a good one. Well, it is a good game but not a great one.

And yes, it took me and my brother several, and I mean so many attempts to clear the early stages. But I think once you get them clear, you kinda get familiar with the gameplay, and the next ones tend to get a bit, only a bit, easier

It just takes a while getting used to the handling. I played on normal and don't remember having much difficulty with any races. Though I also kept an eye on my radar at all times watching for them coming up on me (the rubber banding is ridiculous at times; I'll pass them at near top speed and then, while keeping up my speed, they somehow fly by me like I'm standing still). So just keep an eye on the radar and when you see someone coming up check your rear view and then cut them off, they usually crash pretty easy.

Otherwise like I said it mostly comes down to getting used to the handling. I also found that the hood view was the easiest driving position (first game I've ever used this on, as I was getting better times by several seconds). You also have to make smart use of shortcuts, eventually you'll know which ones to find. Also keep in mind that you want to save your boost until you have a majority of a bar full so that you can get full use of it (doing quick bursts does nothing and uses a fair bit). Also keep in mind that you don't start with all your driver abilities and once they are all unlocked it becomes a lot easier as you can pretty much feed yourself boost non-stop.

EDIT: I'll also mention that it helps to experiment with cars a bit. At first I found the Nissan GT-R to be the best car for me but I've gotten so used to driving the Porsche's that they became my strongest car to race in and could beat the times by sometimes a couple dozen seconds. Just takes a bit of practice and patience and don't be afraid to use the rewinds (the easier the difficulty, the more resets you get). Also I pretty much did a reset anytime I lost a fair bit of speed as even scraping walls can easily add a few seconds to your time.

I have one question did you guys use a XBOX360 controller or a standard controller?

I was using my logtec controller however I think that is the issue for some reason if i i hit down on my left analog stick (which is used to steer) even while accelerating (on right analog) stick I seem to go faster.

I've tried the 360 emulation controller software but it just acts weird.

Ave MPH is about 130 on a straightway but it goes up if i hit down on my steering. I have no idea what causes (nitro isn't being used) this.

Stage 2 where the first gas station is my best example : the course is about 3.8M long, I can't catch up until i'm about 2.1M left into it.

Used a regular PS3 Dual Shock controller as I played it on the PS3. I left it at whatever the default setting is which I am assuming is Normal, and I beat the career part of the game, meaning I completed The Run. It is actually the first NFS game I have beaten since Hot Pursuit iirc. It just requires getting in a groove and really learning the tracks. That, and mastering cornering with the hand-brake, at least for myself. Truly the best advice I can give is just get to a point where you are in the zone, learn how to maximize the turbo, meaning know when and where to use it and how to strategically get more once it is used, and it all will start falling into place.

My face when I actually play in manual gear shift, with a pad and with no assistances of any kind most of the racing games (GRID, NFS: HP 2011, DiRT 3 and NFS: SHIFT)... normally achieving 1st to 3rd position... not yet in HP: The run, I don't have that game...

Used a regular PS3 Dual Shock controller as I played it on the PS3. I left it at whatever the default setting is which I am assuming is Normal, and I beat the career part of the game, meaning I completed The Run. It is actually the first NFS game I have beaten since Hot Pursuit iirc. It just requires getting in a groove and really learning the tracks. That, and mastering cornering with the hand-brake, at least for myself. Truly the best advice I can give is just get to a point where you are in the zone, learn how to maximize the turbo, meaning know when and where to use it and how to strategically get more once it is used, and it all will start falling into place.

Yeah but this is PC version. Can't really compare PS3/360 versions overall. PC ports are always iffy on a lot of things. Similar to how a lot of ports to the PC version aren't 100% compad. with game controllers unless you have a 360 controller (yay for bad programming).

I'm think it is a controller issue which is a shame, I shouldn't have to buy a brand new controller just to play a game. I'd still like to know how hitting down on my steering on my analog stick makes me go faster? I don't have a 360 controller so I cannot test this theory. And I'm not willing to drop a 50 spot to 'test' it lol. That's why I wanted to find out if anyone else had a similar issue with the PC version. I've never had this much problem trying to catch up, at least in the last place car. :(

Even on a flat out straightway I cannot catch up at all and this is like on stage 2 of the game. Heck stage 1 even.

Yeah but this is PC version. Can't really compare PS3/360 versions overall. PC ports are always iffy on a lot of things. Similar to how a lot of ports to the PC version aren't 100% compad. with game controllers unless you have a 360 controller (yay for bad programming).

I'm think it is a controller issue which is a shame, I shouldn't have to buy a brand new controller just to play a game. I'd still like to know how hitting down on my steering on my analog stick makes me go faster? I don't have a 360 controller so I cannot test this theory. And I'm not willing to drop a 50 spot to 'test' it lol. That's why I wanted to find out if anyone else had a similar issue with the PC version. I've never had this much problem trying to catch up, at least in the last place car. :(

Even on a flat out straightway I cannot catch up at all and this is like on stage 2 of the game. Heck stage 1 even.

My apologies, as I did not realize it was in the Computer gaming section, or else I would have never posted about playing it on the PS3.

I would however still posted my tips, as I think they go a long way. The game is at first brutal, no doubt about it. It took me quite some time to get into the zone I mentioned, but once I did, it was smooth sailing, Hopefully you will find it to be the same. This is a game where persistence goes a long, long way.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      580
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      71
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!