Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Gregow

  1. 18 hours ago, Ialyrn said:

    Debatable. This one is all going to come down to if its a normal person in a normal road car with zero IRL rally driving experience. To an actual rally driver in a spec rally car. Its a known fact that rally drivers tend to use techniques that unstick the rear of the car, to a point, on loose surfaces. In order to avoid understeer. And no matter which way you cut it, you have to do similar in Dirt Rally in order to avoid said understeer. I am not saying the physics simulation in Dirt Rally is perfect, because no racing game is. But the fact remains, you have to use real world rally driving techniques in order to do well.[/quote]

    I'm not talking about unsticking the rear or sliding the car. It's quite true that's actually how you drive fast on loose surfaces. No argument there. What I'm talking about is that the inputs would actually not match and that DR2 is playing very nice with you. The inputs in the first Dirt Rally were actually a better match to reality, although that game was otherwise a lot more flawed.

    I agree you would have to use real world rally driving techniques, at least to some extent. There are some exploits you can use in the game that I certainly would not like to try in a real car. Like turn the wheels 90 degrees in a fwd car and floor it, and somehow it turns nicely. Aside from such weirdness, please don't try left foot braking and pendulum turns in real life without first practicing in a safe environment. The physics are sort of there and quite intuitive in the game, but you'll have an accident if you try that in a real car.

    Things like this is also where you'll notice the center pivot and how the tires interact, or don't interact, with the surface. There's a clear discrepancy between the game and reality.

    Not to mention, of course, just the fact of going really fast on gravel roads. In a real car, when you pick up speed, it's something like a hovercraft but you still feel the tires making contact with the surface. Bumps can be really unsettling, if you don't just fly over them. By braking or turning you can make the tires bite down (this part is pretty well done in the game, I think), and by going over that threshold you can maintain a nice slide (not as well replicated in the game).

    18 hours ago, Ialyrn said:


    I dont get it, this all happens in Dirt Rally also. Take the water ditch on Bindo Moorland at the bridge for example. You hit that wrong, you are off into the fences on the opposite side. Or at the very least, facing the wrong direction. Sometimes with some form of vehicle damage. Same goes for the water splash when you first enter the sweet lamb complex. That can throw you all over the place if you hit it wrong or with too much speed, from either side. Catch the snow banks on Sweden wrong, and you are going to damage the front of your car and have a potentially bad run. So again, it all depends on how you attack it.

    If I am doing a time trial run, I go flat out. I drive as hard as I can, and push for anytime extra time I can manage to scrape together. Often resulting in mutiple ruined runs. Hitting a jump wrong, catching the edge of the track in an undisirable place, even braking too late. All often cause some form of loss of control. If I am running a Dirt Daily/weekly event, I tone my driving down so not to risk incurring damage or losing time from spinning out. Since I cant just reset and try again. Same goes for career. So I drive much more conservativly. So it is still all a matter of how far you are willing to push in a given situation.

    On a control pad, all you get is tactile feedback from the rumble motors. It is still feedback, but FFB usually equtes to the sensations sent to a force feedback racing wheel. Either way, that tactile feedback still helps; and is quite good in Dirt Rally.

    Yes, it happens but it's tame. As a comparison, play through rally school in RBR and compare the school stage to the fords in Wales. In this case RBR got it more right than DR, and it should be pretty obvious once you try it. While you're at it, notice that while you can go for maximum attack in both games they are quite different in how you measure and control the pace.

  2. 22 minutes ago, richie said:

    Yep, I mean those nice modern WRC cars. We have similar modern rally cars in the game. They do not handle as nice as the real thing, though. I don't know about you but I crash a lot, lose control, spin out, barrel roll, slide off cliffs or wrap my car around trees. It seems you don't. It's fine. I'm out. 

    First of all, we got R5 cars. Quite different from WRC cars. Heck, watching the latest Wales rally the commentator even mentioned the JWRC/R5 cars as not being as easy to jump as the WRC cars.

    Second, I never claimed I don't crash a lot. That's completely beside the point. My argument has never been "you should crash more", it has been that the game does not present certain challenges and that it's dumbed down. Challenges that certainly would lead to a number of interesting ways to crash, but I'm not asking for Dirty Tree Huggers 2.0.

  3. 21 minutes ago, richie said:

    The rally video's still there to watch for everyone. The evidence is there, how someone still can go on with that nonsensical narrative, is beyond me. Rally cars are stable. They're even more stable than in DR2.0. 

    You mean the video with some nice jumps in modern WRC cars? And you thought I was cherrypicking? There are tons of videos showing exactly what I'm talking about. Go on youtube and enjoy yourself.

  4. 46 minutes ago, richie said:

    Honestly, I don't know because usually if I mess up a jump in 90% of the cases I have to restart the stage because I crashed. Generally, airborne physics is also an area where DR2.0 has vastly improved compared to the first game, and at this point, even if cars do not land on one wheel or nose first, what does this prove? Nothing. By having to cherrypick scenarios that happen in real life to prove your point, you only prove one thing: It's close enough to the real thing. No game can simulate everything that happens IRL. Literally every single scenario you mentioned in previous posts is also happening in the game. 

    Oh, you restart in mid air - do you? Yeah, DR2 improved from the first game. Considering the first Dirt Rally hade better air control than Quake World, that's not saying much. So Codemasters gave the cars more weight, removed the air control aspect, and now we have cars that are too stable.

    Cherrypicking? Here's a list of my ciriticisms:

    Center pivot

    Tire modeling or lack thereof is weird. It lacks real forces acting on the tires.

    Road camber very little effect.

    Bumps and jumps don't upset the cars enough - they're too stable.

    I can also add that the surface model makes it difficult to maintain slides with the cars. On the one hand it's nice to replicate the progression of grip when you slide and load the outside tires, but it also makes the cars more prone to grip and straighten out than they should.

  5. 5 hours ago, richie said:

    Ok then try going full throttle and chase highest speeds in DR2.0, I wish you good luck. I can guarantee, you won't be able to finish one single stage. RBR might have aspects that you think DR2.0 lacks. Your opinion, fine. I haven't read one plausible argument so far, just claims and personal opinions, that outside of this forum seem to be very popular, nothing more. 

    DR2.0 might seem to be tame in comparison to RBR but that just means that the physics in RBR are outdated. It's a 14 year old game, today's tech is much more advanced, and that's why I think DR2.0 is closer to the real thing. Cars drive even better IRL. Any video of real rally proves that. I said this before, ECU controlled active diffs were banned from WRC 13 years ago because basically it had become too easy to drive fast in rally cars (ofc cost reduction was one of the key factors here too).

    That there's not enough feedback in RWD is also just an opinion. I disagree, I think it's brilliant.

    When you're forming your opinion and making claims about RBR, it would be prudent to actually play the game - both vanilla and Next Gen Physics mod. Perhaps then you would get what I'm saying about differences in how you approach the driving.

    Real cars get upset by bumps and jumps in the road. Treat them casually and you will crash and damage the car. The camber of the road has a big impact and can be used to your advantage. Dirt Rally simplifies this a lot. You think that's just my opinion? When was the last time you landed on one wheel after a jump? Or going nose first? Or landing hard on the rear wheels? Answer is, you have to go completely out of control to manage that.

    • Agree 1

  6. 8 minutes ago, Johnnnn said:

    What is wrong with RWD? The RWD feels really good to me and I could drive them pretty good without DR training. So at least they have similar handling like in other games.

    Well, there aren't really many games that are worth comparing to. I elaborated a bit more on this in the 'Tarmac Physics and FFB'-thread. Although drunk driving my phone, I think that should give you an idea of the issues I have with rwd.

  7. 34 minutes ago, ianism said:

    driving a car in a game is never going to be like driving in real life, because your life and your money (repair costs) are never going to be at risk. the extent to which a driving game punishes you for pushing the limits of control is a matter of degree and personal preference.

    the whole point of playing video games in general is to "stroke your ego". some games that are super hard are hard for the sense of accomplishment when you win. other games give you a sense of accomplishment for getting through the story or collecting all the gems or whatever. it's all very similar. the racing game Midnight Club 2 is arcade as hell, but it's also hard as hell because it requires crazy reaction times, control of the car, and knowledge of the cities. getting good in the game is stroking your ego. RBR is no exception, it just happens to fit your definition of "hardcore".

    this applies to tons of stuff. a few years ago, I was a rickshaw rider in Edinburgh. I could pull a 3-wheeled bike up a hill with three fat englishmen up a 15% gradient using only the muscles in my own body. I could do this for 8 hours straight, from 20h00-04h00, two nights in a row. it felt good to be strong and making money in a fun way. that is a very similar sense of accomplishment. just because the game isn't the way you personally like it doesn't mean other people get the same sense of accomplishment in DR2 that you get from doing well in RBR, or someone else gets from climbing a mountain. it's all "stroking your ego". that's just what most leisure activities are. 


    this is the problem with your argument. you say it "should" be more punishing. this is because it does not quite fit your definition of the ideal rally game: one that is as realistic and uncompromising as possible. this is because the sense of accomplishment you personally get out of a game like that is higher than other types of racing games. 

    obviously, this is not the case for other people who are playing the game. the youtuber Jimmy Broadbent is super into sim games and is very good at them, but he now prefers WRC 8 over DR2 when it comes to rally. WRC 8 is significantly more arcade than this game, yet he prefers the sense of accomplishment he gets out of that game over the one in DR2, and all power to him.

    so yeah, speak for yourself, not others.

    You're arguing against your own straw man, not anything I've said.

    While you can't make a game drive exactly as real life, the goal of a simulator is to make the experience as close as possible. Dirt Rally does not and I doubt it was ever the purpose. Thus, it is not "hardcore" (as a sim). We can put whatever label we want on it. Arcade, simcade or whatever. Doesn't really matter.

    You like it that way? Cool. I like the game too but it seems we have different preferences. That's also cool.

    However, it is not a hardcore sim. I wish it was. You don't. Fine.

    I like WRC 8 too and in some ways it's more sim than DR. In others, it's not. I'll just wait for it to get patched before committing too much time to it. 

    Ps. And the "speak for yourself" was directed at the comment that "anyone who's watched real rally...".

  8. 3 hours ago, richie said:

    I haven't played RBR obviously as I'm a console noob but I have seen some gameplay and to me it just looks so outdated in every aspect. Anyone who has watched real rallying will agree, DR2.0 is far superior in terms of handling and physics. Hardcore damage could use some tweaks though, as I feel it really is a bit too forgiving. 

    I find it interesting that people who were complaining about spinning out too much a few days ago now say 'sorry guys, but it's too easy, it's made to make you feel good'. I agree, DR2.0 makes me feel really good as it is so much fun and an absolute blast to drive. So rewarding when you get it right, and so punishing if you make a tiny mistake. The devs did an amazing job in improving handling and physics. 


    Speak for yourself, not others. RBR is dependent on mods, what cars you use and on which tracks you use them. It's full of flaws and it's old and outdated. Still, it has aspects that DR lacks 

    Like, cross a ford. Hit it wrong and/or too fast and you will damage the car, bounce off track and crash. You can mess up the front, or rear or both. Depends on how you attack it.

    Go over a jump and the car can twist, the nose can dive or the rear will come too high. Depends on your approach.

    You can't just go full throttle or chase the highest speed. You must always have a measured approach. 

    Bumps, crests, road camber, pot holes etc upset the car, or can be used to your advantage, in a way that doesn't exist in DR.

    Dirt Rally is tame in comparison.

    Yes, rwd cars in DR are harder to drive than they should because of lack of feedback from the game and the fact they don't behave as rwd cars should. That's not hardcore. It's an artificial problem caused by the games physics.

    It's not about difficulty level per se. It's easy to make a game hard to play. That doesn't make it more realistic. But neither does making the handling more casual make it more realistic.

    Thing is, DR is not punishing where it should be. Sometimes it's punishing where it should not.

    • Agree 2

  9. 13 hours ago, ianism said:

    Oh, so I see you've breezed through masters in the career mode then?

    but yeah, DR and the current game aren't as hardcore as they could be because the series became popular as an arcade series. there's still a lot of name recognition with the Dirt franchise among less hardcore gamers. so that's why the menus are nice. that's why there's less information about what's going on "under the hood" of the game than there should be (stuff like part wear and damage, tire wear, stage degradation, etc are all more complicated than they appear, and there's no information about it).

    I'm not saying it's a good thing. it just is what it is.

    No, I have not breezed through it and that's not an indication of how hardcore (or not) the driving is.

    What I'm saying is if you try to drive a car in real life, like you do in Dirt Rally, you will crash very badly. And it's not because the lack of g-forces when playing the game, or lack of feeling the bumps in the road or any such thing. It's because the game is made easier to drive than it should be, and the cars don't behave quite as they should.

    That's what I mean by the game not being hardcore, and that it strokes your ego.

  10. 46 minutes ago, MaXyMsrpl said:

    I would be very careful with hardcore term. Its far from proper simulation in a lot of areas. Yep, it's enjoyable, might be enjoyable by hardcore players. 
    But I would never say it's made for them. It's somewhere in the middle between arcade and hardcore sim.

    I completely agree. My biggest disappointment with DR is that it's far too arcade.

    Not saying the games are bad and unenjoyable, but I'd say they're far off from being hardcore. Actually, not even in the same universe.

    I long for the day of a real spiritual successor to RBR. Not saying it's still the best in realism. But, it was a game that did it's very best to be the most realistic. No excuses whatsoever. This is rally, just deal with it. You needed the rally school not to rage quit the game and never play again.

    That's hardcore.

    Not saying difficulty equals realism, but real rally is gosh darn hard. RBR never gave a ****, it just did it's best to be real. And that's why it's legend.

    Dirt Rally... sorry, but it's made to stroke your ego and make you feel good.

  11. 3 hours ago, richie said:

    Well, if no one can convince you then there's no point in discussing this. Settings are there to be modified to your liking, aren't they? The stock setup has been dialed in by someone who thought 'that's good enough' for a base tune, so why not dial in some understeer if find it too oversteery? Actually opening up the diff isn't the best idea because you'll be losing power while accelerating. An open diff sends always 50/50 torque to both wheels, regardless of slip. With a more locked diff you can actually steer with the throttle. The game does a fantastic job in reproducing this, in my view of course. 

    No, that's not how an open diff works. It sends the power to the wheel that's rotating the most. That's why you want some lock to the diff, so you don't just spin the wheel with least traction. This, of course, has it's own limits and trade offs (like making the car harder to rotate).

    The stock setups are very good for what they are, making the cars behave similar to their real life counterparts. At least judging by the ones I've driven.

    However, they do not behave like real cars woukd. No matter how you tune them. They have similar characteristics, but doing the same things you could in a real car does not always translate well.

    RWD cars are an excellent example. Problem isn't over or understeer. The problem is you can't dig in the rear wheels and balance the car properly with the throttle.

    I don't mean they're impossible to balance. I mean, for example, you can't send the rear out and plant your foot without spinning. I mean, you can't really catch the rear, when it's kicking out, with your foot.

    Driving a reasonably powered rwd car, say sub 300bhp, on gravel in real life is... well, a piece of cake actually. Well, probably excluding the Stratos and others with short wheelbases and very light weight.

    I used to drive a 300+ hp Nissan 180SX (S13) on gravel roads, weighing somewhere around 1100Kg. It was very easy to drive.

    I've driven Escort MK2, E30 M3, Porsche 944, Toyota MR2, Alfa 75, Opel Manta, Volvo 240... all on gravel. They were all easy (well, the MR2 could be a bit unpredictable). Never spun out. It was not even an issue. You don't have to feather the throttle. You dig the gosh darn rear wheels in, let it go a little wide and counter steer. Piece of cake.

    Forget that in DR2. Heck, you can spin out at 30kph.

    • Agree 1

  12. 3 minutes ago, Kjell007 said:

    Some says there is too much sliding, and some says it is too twichy. My opinion the game should have more grip on loose surfaces.

    I'd say both are depending on what the heck you're doing with the car. Like, if you enter a corner and quickly turn the wheels 90 degrees, you should not be able to go fast. You can use the understeer to your advantage, and that should never be an advantage in a rally car (was it Colin McRae who called it a sin?).

    Sometimes the wheels should get more traction under braking or acceleration. Like, you should be able to dig in the rear wheels in a rwd car by stepping on it. 

    AWD cars feel the most natural but you can't really load the corners. There's no bite there at all.

    The sliding itself is pretty nice, mostly. It feels like there's real depth to the surface, but there's a lot of dynamics missing.

    • Agree 2

  13. 5 minutes ago, bn880 said:

    Very few people like the cuts, the consensus appears to be that people would prefer they didn't exist or that the extreme ones would be penalized.  For now though it is what it is and it's important not to A) Call people cheaters if it's not an exploit and B) not to over estimate the benefit of most cuts, as then you're lying at minimum to yourself.

    For me the worst thing about the cuts is that it requires time/research to find them.   In some cases it also adds a chaos over skill component.

    Well, I apologise for calling it cheating. As per PJTiernys post quoted above, it's clearly not cheating.

    I do take issue with the rules, how they're formulated and the definition of exploits, but that's on Codemasters and not the contenders.

    • Agree 2

  14. 2 minutes ago, Mike Dee said:

    I'd argue it is only important for the final top 0.01% of drivers. For the rest of us "normies", taking the cut or not won't change the fact we are outside of the top 10. We could take every cut but it won't magically make us anywhere close to Micky, Joona, or Jarrod's time.

    So because of that, just race the best you can and try to see how far you can climb. If you can make top 100, I'd say that's a pretty solid pace you can put up.

    Sure, I don't doubt you're right about that. Howrver, there's more to it than cutting. Tweak the graphics, steering angle, camera, use the quirks of the physics etc.

    I bet Joona and the others would be in the top regardless. No argument there. But these things make it more gaming than racing.

    Reminds me of way back when I used to play Quake 3. My friends forced me to play with default settings. I still won 15 against 1 (didn't have more friends than that 😉 ). But did all my tweaks, all my knowledge of exploits, trick jumps etc help when competing against other serious players? You bet!

    I don't have a problem with it if we're talking Quake. I don't like it when talking a supposedly rally sim.

  15. 3 hours ago, Yaggings said:

    I understand the disappointment/anger at the fact that cuts have made it to the championship - but I do not understand displaying anger at those that use them.
    There is no actual rally skill at display here - just muscle memory, repeating the same line you've driven hundreds of times on the same track. As such, a cut is just another line you have to learn. In a game about learning the track, I find it weird that you might get angry at someone finding a better route and using it.

    Fair enough. Don't hate the player, hate the game, as the old saying goes.

    For me I guess it's mostly disappointment that is more a gamers game than a driver's.

    Don't get me wrong. I know there are some real drivers out there and no matter how you put it does take a lot of skill to be in the top. I just don't like it when gaming the game is an important aspect. That just kills all my interest in it.

    • Agree 1

  16. On 9/27/2019 at 9:08 PM, Buckwilder said:

    I think it has to do with the requirement to make cars slide around because it is a Rally game. As a byproduct, all cars have the same trait and ability to slide about a center axis, regardless of the drivetrain type. This would also explain why even when not sliding - cars still feel unplanted or as though they are excessively influenced by inertia (even when none exists). That is, changes in weight ‘load’ cause the cars in this game to rotate - but not shift weight to each corner as they would in real life. Seems to me this would all be done to cut code required to accurately reproduce lateral load and suspension behaviour. The lack of suspension behaviour and tire slip feel thus becomes absent (which it is), on all surfaces - the most pronounced of which is tarmac...as they cant fake reactive forces on a flat surface the same as you can explain away or hide the same phenomenon on a bumpy, slippery, and uneven terrain.

    Yeah, I guess it's a simplified model made to make the cars cool to slide around. Sadly, the more I play the more this behavior annoys me. As you say, the cars rotate but lack real tire load. Sure, you can toss the cars around but it's like the tires don't have contact with the road (or at least don't have real forces acting on them).

    Another telling example I think are the rwd cars. I can't really come to grips with them. One aspect is the lack of feeling the rear end kick loose, but also they don't drive as the should.

    When I've driven rwd cars on gravel I've used a pretty simple technique. Lift off to rotate the car, step on the throttle and apply some opposite lock. What happens is the rear wheels dig in and accelerate you out of the corner.

    In DR what happens is, you get lift off oversteer and with a little throttle you spin out. And that's even with low powered cars. It's like there's no load transfered to the rear tires.

    • Agree 2

  17. 11 minutes ago, mimimomo said:

    Can confirm I used to have this problem with my TMX wheel (so you are not alone) - solution for me has been to only play Dirt 2 (not because of this problem, just can't be bothered with AC or PCars anymore with Dirt 2 fulfilling all my driving desires)

    Yeah, well... I have quite a few games I like to play. At first I thought it was the Logitech drivers, because the Logitech drivers are pure *****. However, I have the same problem with my T300. It's obviously a problem with Dirt Rally 2 not releasing the driver properly, when quitting the game. And I'm not too keen on killing the driver and restarting it, with the usual auto-calibration of the wheel, just to play a different game. Frankly, it sucks. And I'm pretty sure DR2 is to blame here - it's not quitting nicely at all.