Printable View
I've been thinking about reasons why and comparing it too things like NFL game pass and NBA. WIth the US ones you are only able to get the yearly pass, if you go the monthly route you are required to go the full 12 months. However with the Rally you can get 1 month and cancel after the month, so I suppose they want to prevent people from getting it in December and watching the whole year in a month and saving money?Quote:
Originally Posted by sonnybobiche
Yeah that only has a few stages not every stage. Oh well.Quote:
Originally Posted by bf1_IRL
Still got a feeling that timetable will be big issue... That rallysafe is worse than previous system. There at least it's been shown. Here you get nothing and when you get it's all wrong and incorrect..
Maybe eWRC should bid for the next contract :D
Bloody disaster so far.
New lead presenter (why?) who doesn't seem to know anything about the sport.
Desborough going from co-presenter, where he was actually good, back to color commentary, where he just doesn't work well.
Lightpods blinding the cameras to the point where not even the commentators can make out what's going on, and yet nobody can think to tell the drivers to turn them off? Or adjust the cameras?
Fancy new timing supplier that can't even manage to provide live timing on a short superspecial, so nobody at home can tell who's up and who's down.
Just get a cameraman at the finish line so we can at least tell who won each heat!
And throughout it all, a commentary team that for whatever reason can't bring themselves to say, "we apologise to the viewers. We are clearly suffering from some technical issues and we're doing our best to get it working. In the meantime here is what we believe are the standings so far..." A brand new viewer would think that this is how things normally are and would swear off the sport forever.
I understand it's not easy to get all of this right, but it's so frustrating to see.
If the live timing doesn't work tomorrow, somebody needs to be fired. Not disciplined, fired.
Timing works well. All time pop-up quite fast. Trouble that now graphic times on TV screen it's TV director issue, not timing system.Quote:
Originally Posted by sonnybobiche
Do you know what is heartbreaking for me? :( I just came through the live SSS and I can't help but notice that there is no hope they will ever stop framing the wheels so tightly you can't even see the cars! (see the left and right bends respectively before and after the SSS bridge, for instance). They should forget about all this "artistic" sh*t and just focus on the action!!! All other sports use larger and normal takes (more like the amateurs' ones) that don't make you feel sick by zooming in and out so wildly. Imagine them filming a soccer match and framing only the players' shoes...:grenade: Slowmo, falling gopros and all other cinematographic tricks are captivating for advertisments. They are really nice as appetizers but it's exactly the contrary when the cars are on the stages. That's the main reason why I chose motorsportfilmer and the other uploaders over wrc+ as my official wrc broadcasters :) They should buy their thrilling videos since they upload in no time and in very high quality (actually they use their work right now when something get lost). For what it concerns advertising purposes, just separately embed two minutes of publicity instead of placing the cameras on straights to include the banner, recording pointless images. I heared that tv spectators' attention is so focused on cars and motorbikes in circuit racing that they almost don't notice the banner (You may have noticed that by yourself).Quote:
Originally Posted by sonnybobiche
Just my thoughts. Don't be too harsh :)
And why was there Kristoffersson leading for a long time when actually Tidemand set the fastest time. Then half of RC2 drivers didn't show up on official site until others start. Then again stopped for a while with Paddon's time. And all that follows was then delayed too much. That system is crap until they fix it properly.Quote:
Originally Posted by KKS
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sanremo
Oh man, don't get me started on video quality. They technically stream in "HD" (actually 720p, which I guess was considered HD 5-10 years ago), but the compression is so barbaric that it ends up having lower detail than a 480p video. I guess it saves them a few cents on bandwidth, but I mean some of the onboards have less detail than they did in the early 2000s! They spend tens of thousands of euros on giant cameras and lenses that could capture microscopic detail, but the final product literally looks worse than what some guy uploads onto youtube from his iPhone for free. But yeah, I don't want to complain too much about that yet. There are more basic problems to sort out first.
What happened to the blonde presenter from Monte? She was good