Sorry, but Colin McRae series has never been realistic. The closest so far has been Richard Burns Rally but even that has downsides.Quote:
Originally Posted by jonlint
Printable View
Sorry, but Colin McRae series has never been realistic. The closest so far has been Richard Burns Rally but even that has downsides.Quote:
Originally Posted by jonlint
By realistic, I mean cars that are part of the championship, proper length stages, stages that are not just loops or variants of the same piece of road like Dirt, etc. It seems the masses think Dirt and Need for Speed is their reality now!
An interview (in Spanish) by Nacho Villarin with Dani Sordo has just been published http://www.revistascratch.com/wrc/notic ... roen-16375
It provides some of Dani's thoughts on strengths & weaknesses of the i20.
I would love to hear Sordo's thoughts.
Unfortunately, I can neither speak nor read Spanish.
Would it be too much to ask for people to provide a link to a translated version of what they post, or at least summarise its contents?
You can pop the url into google translate, easy
http://translate.google.com/translate?s ... roen-16375
I agree. If you ask people who aren't fans or familiar with rallies about them, I would bet that most would say that they're about fast 4WD cars/trucks racing and drifting through dirt. I mean, look no further than the title of that game - "Dirt".Quote:
Originally Posted by jonlint
One example of this ignorance and misconception of rallies is in an argument I was having on another forum. The person I was arguing with claimed that the Ferrari 288 GTO was never built for the WRC in mind because "mid engine/RWD vs. AWD everything else would have been laughable". I countered that, besides the fact that the engine displacement to weight ratio and total number of 288 GTOs manufacture was very close to the Group B homologation requirements, the Lancia 037 already existed as a mid-engine/RWD car that took the 1983 WRC manufacturer's title and had won several rallies. The point is that this person believed that rally cars needed AWD because they raced exclusively on dirt and other loose surfaces, whereas the 037 typically won tarmac-heavy rallies because its drivers dealt with less understeer than the drivers of the mighty Quattros did, and as such didn't have to fight their cars as much.
As to your other point, I'm not sure if we can define what "proper" is anymore. The reality of rallies has changed since the 1980's, and not just because of less power compared with the peak Group B days. The Special Stage Rallies back then seemed to mimic the traditional rallies in that they were true endurance events lasting 10 or more hours over the course of 3-5 days. They also typically had over 40 special stages. By contrast, WRC rallies nowadays seem to slot in around 3-5 hours typically with maybe ~20 special stages (including those short super special stages meant to please crowds in cities), but typically over the same 3-5 days.
And though you mention "loops or variants of the same piece of road", it's actually not that much different for many rallies in the WRC. Admittedly, I'm just a novice in learning about and watching the modern WRC, but it still shocked me a bit that many of the special stages were just repeats of previous stages. During one day of competition, the organizers would typically run 4 special stages in the morning (one of them being a short super special stage)...and then run the exact same special stages in the afternoon. Those 8 stages that day would really be just 4 stages run twice in the exact same direction, not even in reverse!
It seems like what's "proper" nowadays is an emphasis on having rallies be a relatively short series of all-out sprints, whereas the 1980's WRC seemed to emphasize not just the sprints that the special stages represented, but the endurance aspect of traditional rallies as well. Whatever the reason for this change in the spirit of rallies (I suspect driver/co-driver safety by reducing fatigue plays a part here), it is what it is.
But still - Dirt doesnīt content 20 different stages no matter what on tarmac or gravel which are 350 Kīs... Dirt is still a roundabout game for computer youngsters... :p
The problems with the DIRT franchise are endemic to the entire video game industry. It costs millions of dollars to develop these games, and so studios will naturally have to make millions of dollars in sales just to cover their costs and break even before they can even think about making a profit. So Codemasters were forced to go as broad in their appeal as possible so as to try and attract as many potential customers as they could. That got them the biggest budget. On the other hand, a hardcore rally simulator would be something of a niche (I'm a dedicated rally fan, but only as casual gamer, and when I do play, I prefer the likes of Assassin's Creed to racing games), which makes it harder to turn a profit, and so gets them a smaller budget. And for a studio that is as small as Codemasters, one loss-making game could kill the entire studio.
I really miss a Richard Burns update WRC 2013.... :bounce:
IMO, the only remotely feasible way for a studio to release a true WRC simulation game is piece-by-piece. In this model, a studio would sell you the base game for the price a regular game, and then sell you each rally as individual downloadable content (DLC) until you buy them all to complete a whole season. I would imagine the DLC rallies would probably be priced higher than the typical DLC add-ons to games because each of them are going to be in unique settings, and not just set in the same setting as the original game (like in the Grand Theft Auto games).
That said , there's a reason why I call this idea "remotely feasible". As Prisoner Monkeys stated, a true rally simulator game would simply be too niche for normal market to bear. Instead, I would imagine something akin to what's happening with RBR nowadays, but with a modern graphics engine. Basically, it will be up to a dedicated gaming community (mostly scattered around in Europe) to create most of the special stages for the rallies from scratch. Of course, no matter how dedicated they are, nobody will go out of their way o create a full season of full rallies for what amounts to little to no compensation.
That's always been Codemasters' problem - they don't support the modding community. I get that studios aren't keen on gamers modifying their product, but Codemasters go out of their way to discourage it by coding those barriers into the product.
For me, the thing that killed Dirt 3 was the lack of variety in the stages. I did not mind the handling, but it felt like a bit of a rip-off when most of the events ran over the same pieces of the road - especially when Colin McRae Rally 2.0 had over eighty individual stages. Sure, some were run in reverse, but they were long enough and challenging enough that they felt original.
If it's really such an issue for Codemasters, all they have to do is make a hardcore option for dedicated gamers along with the more arcade-style handling, and then release a stage designer as DLC. The scenery might be generic, but it's the challenge of the design that matters. Perhaps there could be some way of submitting designs to Codemasters, which they could render properly, bundle them together and release them as DLC packages.
Though I've never played any of the Dirt games, I suspect that Codemasters have already decided what direction they want to go with this series. As I said before, there it is in the title - "Dirt". With a title like that, do any of us honestly believe that they're going to throw even the tiniest bone to true rally enthusiasts?
For this generation of young gamers, "rally" is all about drifting, driving through and throwing around dirt, those Ken Block Gymkhana videos on youtube, etc. This is especially true in the U.S., which is definitely the market Codemasters was looking to attract when it decided to change the game from "Colin McRae Rally" to "Dirt". The rally presence in the U.S. is essentially nil. And for many who do have an inkling of the term "rally", it's due in large part to the X-Games. Whereas in Europe and elsewhere in the world, rallies are seen as they are presented in the WRC and other rally championships, here in the U.S., rally racing is seen as a ToTaLLY EXTReMe SPoRT practiced by guys like Ken Block, Travis Pastrana, and other drivers who chug copious amounts of Monster energy drink.
The fact that it's an X-Games event means that winning and fast times are essentially meaningless because, well, who the hell even remembers the winners from any of the X-Games (besides maybe Shaun White, who seems to win every time at whatever event he's doing)? For fans of the X-Games, it's all about the spectacle (and chugging energy drinks), not the results. The same goes for the Dirt game series vs. what actual WRC rallies represent. For most American gamers who play Dirt, winning isn't about setting the fastest times or winning a championship, but rather bragging to your bro after you beat him by sending his car into the guardrail on the last turn.
They did release Dirt Showdown, which was made up mostly of the non-rally events like Gymkhana, and added in demolition derbies and so on. It appeared to be an attempt to bundle all of those game modes together and launch them as a spin-off franchise. The game appears to have been a critical and commercial failure, but I suspect it was an experiment to try and separate them out and explore the possibility of making Dirt 4 a rally-only game (possibly with Rallycross and Trailblazer events attached).
Meanwhile, it's less than 2 weeks until the cars competition debut. I can't wait to see the i20 in the flesh!
I'm curious to see how well it can perform with such a short testing period (especially by its number one driver).Quote:
Originally Posted by 306 Cosworth
It did seem that VW team took a rather "German" route* with how it developed the Polo WRC, since they didn't bring it to competition until they deemed it ready to match the other WRC cars. By contrast, the Hyundai team seems to be taking a "Korean" route with the i20 WRC by throwing it immediately into competition (even if it's still somewhat half-baked) and continuing to develop it as the season progresses. It's a route that Hyundai has taken with their normal cars, so it comes as no surprise to me that they would do this with their WRC cars as well.
* Perhaps it's also a "Japanese" route to development, since Toyota Team Europe (by orders from Toyota Japan) had shrouded the development and technical details of the ST165 Celica in secrecy, and kept it from competing too much before they deemed it ready to take down the dominant Lancia Delta Integrales. It was all about "keeping face" and "not bringing shame" to the parent company in Japan.
With that in mind, is it any wonder that Japan and Germany were allies in WWII, and that it's been said that the only people in the world who wouldn't dare walk across a deserted intersection in the middle of a night if they didn't have the green light signal are the citizens brought up in the respective cultures of both countries?
I can't believe I'm reading this bollocks... Is it any wonder people still think like this.Quote:
Originally Posted by lewalcindor
@ThomasS - I think you meant 'It is a wonder that people still think like this' conveying your incredulity.
As it stands your statement says they've got justification for such outdated views ;)
But hey, when 70% of people polled in France see nothing wrong with reverse 'heil' salutes (quenelle) then it's clear most people learn nothing from history :rolleyes:
another "special" one... oh well...Quote:
Originally Posted by lewalcindor
I am concerend that they will end up like Suzuki, struggling as the car isnt fully developed and then pulling out as they arent getting the results they wanted...I really hope not though as they have a very good driver line up and adding a new spice to the WRC!
If you want to agree that today's modern world and globalized economy means that every country and culture is the same and that we're all no different from one another, then by all means, go ahead and believe that. But if you look at history (as some of you put it), then you can see that the Japanese and Korean do indeed go through different routes when it comes to releasing their cars to the general market or their racing cars through FIA racing series (which is scant, outside of the Accent WRC from a decade ago and whatever Rhys Millen does).
For example, look at the history of Honda in the U.S. Early American workers at Honda have stated that the first thing they did when they joined the company was not to build motorcycles from scratch, but to continuously disassemble and reassemble an already-built Japanese-built Honda motorcycle to learn the intricacies of the design, build, and quality behind Honda products. By contrast, Hyundai released its Excel to the U.S. in the 1980's by immediately chasing after the big dogs, having the gall to go after BMW with a sub $6k car in its commercials despite the fact that the Excel was one of the worst cars at that time. By contrast, American consumers started to move in large numbers towards Japanese cars during the 1970's gas prices because the comparable Japanese compact was so much more reliable and better than the comparable American compact.
And can we not agree that Hyundai remained in the marketplace despite the Excel, and continued to slowly and steadily improve its products in that marketplace instead of "saving face" by pulling all of their products and properly developing them behind closed doors before releasing them? Even nowadays, automotive journalists agree that while Hyundai and Kia products have come a long way since the Excel and Sephia days, they still lack some of the refinement of their Japanese competitors (mainly in steering feel and effort, structural stiffness, and suspension refinement and sophistication, the latter of which the i20 WRC may finally help to address).
So perhaps we can acknowledge that there are some differences between cultures which pertain to the manufacturers brought up in the respective cultures instead of immediately jumping on our high horses playing PC police here, no?
LOL...
Maybe we should think of this year for Hyundai like VW's year with the Fabia.. learning some stuff about how to run a rally team, developing the car in background. Afterall they will have a brand new car next year so this one doesn't matter too much.Quote:
Originally Posted by lewalcindor
@lewalcindor
Dude , linking cultural practices in manufacturing with why the Germans and Japanese were allies in the war is going to open you up to mockery and derision. It was a dumb comment. Don't try and justify it , best to leave it be and move on while your ahead. At any rate its completely off topic.
The only differences, I suppose, is that Hyundai is actually putting their name on their development car (though it's not like they have any subsidiary brands that they can use, unless you count Kia), and that the i20 is going to be built to the full WRC formula specs rather than the S2000 formula specs that the Fabia did (and still does).Quote:
Originally Posted by RS
I admit it was a throwaway comment that I'm not completely serious about (though I still think that there's at least a grain of truth behind it - it's not like they just became allies for no reason, right?). The problem is that you linked my entire post and called it "bollocks" rather than just referring to that statement, so I took it upon myself to say what I had to say in my following post.Quote:
Originally Posted by ThomasS
I apologize for it, but next time, call me out on specific statements instead of calling my entire post bullshit.
I would love to see your references for "keeping face " and " not bringing shame". Where did you get that from ?
Absolutely. I think this year's result's won't matter much for them, they'll count on Neuville's ambition to get some, if he will be capable of course, but mostly it'll be tesing and development I believe.Quote:
Originally Posted by RS
Graham Robson's book on the Celica GT-Four from his "Rally Giants" series. You could literally buy it for less than a dollar (it goes closer to $5 US when you add shipping, but it's still a great deal. You almost can't not buy it for that price, and I highly recommend it.Quote:
Originally Posted by ThomasS
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/184..._prd_ttl_sol_1
So if you do have the book at hand, or when you do buy it, turn to Page 29 to see this quote for yourself:
There it is in writing, and from the pen of a very well respected racing and rally journalist. I did muck up what he actually wrote a bit, but the meaning is still there.Quote:
Because the Japanese have a policy of not 'losing face' if it can be avoided, Toyota's initial approach to campaigning the four-wheel-drive Celicas was to reveal as little as possible about the cars to the media, and particularly to keep many of their problems behind closed doors.
Look - I know in today's modern less-savage world, we like to think of ourselves as totally enlightened and completely willing to look at all cultural stereotypes as nothing more than fiction. But the problem with that thought process is that every culture IS different, and that many cultural stereotypes don't just exist for the sheer reason that some nasty individuals in the past decided one day to make them up on the spot to try to spite that culture and the people who grew up within it. Stereotypes exist because enough has been acted upon or done by the culture for others (even the culture and the people themselves) to label them with such generalizations. I'm not saying everybody from that culture fits these stereotypes, obviously.
As for the Koreans, their stereotype here is trying to beat Japan at their own game, whether it's automobiles or electronics. The origins behind this one is obvious - Japan during the first half of the 20th Century had occupied and ruled over Korea, and the Japanese essentially tried to completely quash the Korean language and culture altogether. There's no love lost between the two nations, and even if Japan doesn't necessarily see Korea as a competitor, Korea does see Japan as a competitor.
And my statement of the Koreans "putting products on the market even if they're not perfect" is borne out by Samsung. Do you see many Sony flat-panel TVs out there, or is Samsung dominating the market? Samsung didn't necessarily produce the best TVs. They simply put them out on the market even if they were somewhat flawed at first, continued to develop and improve the TVs, and let the consumers keep buying them until the name "Samsung" was synonymous with high end TVs. Meanwhile, Sony did what it had always done - they developed their flat panel TVs the "Japanese" way, and didn't put their TVs out on the market until they deemed it good enough. Of course, by that time, Samsung was already well ahead in market share.
Isnīt this post-bar-talk in an empty afterparty, 5 o clock in the morning after a wet evening? Very off topic, I would say.
share your opinion on the Colorado Beetle vs the Asian Longhorned Beetle and their impact on the Global Warming next...Quote:
Originally Posted by lewalcindor
Are you a real person ?Quote:
Originally Posted by lewalcindor
lololol
In Monte-Carlo ready to be driven in anger for the first time ...
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bdy44lICQAAteVg.jpg:large
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bdy1AP0CAAARHfN.jpg:large
What cars do they use for the recce?
BMW 1er, probably X-drive. Photos in RMC thread I think.
thanks!
Looks like it could be a 135i xDrive, great car! 320hp 4wd and 0-100km/h in 4,7s :facelick:
Samsung and Sony had a joint tv venture for a few years, so Koreans and Japanese have 'worked' together.
I think Neuville if he drives as well as he did in 2013 will 'carry' the Hyundai to a few results in 2014.
Some guy wrote on our autosport.cz forum that those cars are ordinary 120d equipped with racing seats and sumpguard only! Same cars are said to be on the way to Mexico...Quote:
Originally Posted by OnlyRally
RWD cars for recce? Odd choice.
You can buy 120d with xDrive.
First rally plates and chassis of i20 WRC are on ewrc-results.com
http://ewrc-results.com/cars.php?cid=55 ... ai-i20-WRC