Jump to content Jump to content
F1 2021 | Online Services Update 11:00AM UK Time | Expected to last no longer than 2 hours ×

HoksuHoo

Members
  • Content Count

    479
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

Everything posted by HoksuHoo

  1. The way you keep lecturing and asserting while you refuse to understand the point is kind of irritating you know. It's not about being too slow for your level. The difficulty is broken since there is a huge difference in difficulty between the randomized times in qualifying and when the same drivers are on the track with you. I truly have no idea how to make you understand that. Same driver in your heat: 2:40 Same driver in other heats: 2:28 That is a huge discrepancy. OP won every heat by five seconds but finished 14th. He is way too fast for the AI drivers at that le
  2. Facepalm. I can beat the AI drivers I race against. If I reach semi-finals or finals I win. My level isn't too high, the level of the random times is horribly mismatched compared to the AI drivers on the track. The same thing happens in every heat. Physical AI drivers do 2:40 while random times start from 2:28. Again that is not about one driver being faster than the other. Kevin Hansen in my heat does 2:40, Kevin Hansen in other heats does 2:28. Because the randomized times are not the same level as when they are on the track with you. Why is this so hard for you to understand?
  3. That is not how it works at all. You don't understand what you are talking about. If I manage to consistently post times that are 3-5 seconds per lap faster than the physical AI drivers, then imagine what happens in semi-finals and finals where I race against the physical AI drivers that are 3-5 seconds per lap slower than me. I can match the physical AI drivers just fine, like OP. The problem is the random times are nowhere near the same level as them. That is not about Kevin Hansen being faster than Pal Try, that is about the random times being far faster than when the same driver
  4. The random times in rallycross qualifying are broken. There is often a staggering discrepancy between the level of the AI drivers in your heat and in semi-finals and finals, compared to the random times from the other heats. The random times should be around the same level as the AI opponents you race against but they are worlds apart. Here is one example. Fastest AI driver is 2:40 while random times start from 2:28. 3 seconds per lap is the gap between AI drivers and the random times. That is not even close to the worst I have seen. 7 or 8 seconds discrepancy for 4 laps is pretty common
  5. Nope. That is not how rallycross works. Winning final does not guarantee you win the event since it's decided on points. And since the random times in qualifying are often severely mismatched and way faster than the AI drivers in your heat you often lose lots of points in qualifying even if you drive well for your level. I usually win every heat but don't even qualify for semi-finals because the random times are 8-20 seconds faster than the AI drivers in my heat. Kinda made me stop bothering with offline rallycross
  6. You can always quit at end of a stage, before proceeding to the next stage. Select the "quit to main menu" option. DO NOT pick any option that includes the word "retire", that means event over and DNF
  7. Interior lighting in Subaru Legacy does not work, no light at all other than shift light and gear indicator Steam, super deluxe edition 1230v3, GTX 1070, 16gb ram, SSD, Windows 10, SB Z 2D, 2560x1440 60Hz Logitech G920+shifter
  8. When using cockpit view with the lowest field of view, the driver position is far too much forward with many cars. The driver position adjust is very limited in DR2.0 and bizarrely does not allow moving backwards from default position. The default driver positions were changed with many cars in 1.12 update, and in many cars the update made the position worse than it was How a cockpit view with lowest FOV should look like (notice A-pillar and instruments well visible): How it looks like with most cars. See how much closer to the windshield this is than the Impreza NR4 above
  9. Ford RS200 has a very low-res and blurry texture between bonnet and dashboard. I have been reporting this since like September Steam, super deluxe edition 1230v3, GTX 1070, 16gb ram, SSD, Windows 10, SB Z 2D, 2560x1440 60Hz Logitech G920+shifter
  10. In rallycross qualifying the random times from other heats are often massively faster than the AI drivers in your heat. They should be around the same level but there can be a 7-20 second mismatch. I play career mode on elite level, or freeplay with 80-90 difficulty, and on most tracks there is a 7-8 second gap between the physical drivers you race against and the random AI times. On Killarney it's 16-20 which is just mind-boggling. 4-5 seconds per lap on a 1km track. That is a staggering mismatch. 7-8 seconds for 4 laps is huge and that is on most tracks. This makes offl
  11. Finland in daytime/clear and daytime/overcast has a horrible looking thick fog on it. Completely unrealistic for the weather (I live in Finland so I would know, also every single Finnish player says this is not even close to how it looks like in reality), looks painfully awful, and you can barely see the road in what should be crystal clear weather with no fog at all. Scotland is almost as foggy, and Wales is pretty poor looking in daytime as well. I wouldn't know if it's realistic in those locations or not, but given the fog is "for performance reasons" then probably n
  12. Yeah and you can have a gigantic mismatch in rallycross random AI times vs. the drivers in your qualifier. Maybe, just maybe, a more basic approach could be a good idea when you super hyper advanced AI simulation makes singleplayer rallycross unplayable on certain difficulties And with no mention in 1.13 patch notes so apparently singleplayer rallycross remains broken forever thanks to your super hyper advanced AI simulation, awesome
  13. Only to those who have deluxe/super deluxe, to others it's paid DLC, as opposed to a free update like M2. So the cars won't be skinnable like all other DLC cars, unfortunately. No correlation at all here. Class, and whether the cars are skinnable or not, are two entirely separate things. Case in point: Porsche 911 R-GT. All other R-GT class cars are skinnable but since Porsche is DLC it's not. Why do people care about how fast their car is, and how well it can compete against other cars, in a racing game where you compete against other drivers? Truly such a mystery.
  14. There is no such option currently. You just set the class and players pick any car in that class (that they have) If clubs won't get such an option then having some dailies/weeklies/monthlies that are restricted to some of the game's under-used cars would be cool. 240Z, Ascona, Escort Cosworth, Camaro, MG Metro etc.
  15. I'm pretty sure that how fast a car is compared to other cars isn't ALL subjective. Maybe something like: Late 90's: Evo VI, Impreza S4 Early 2000s: Focus 2001, 206, Impreza 2001, Fabia Late 2000s: Focus 2007, C4, Impreza 2008 It's just a real waste of a nice car to have it in a class where it's off the pace. No idea what to do about the Legacy though, objectively it should be slower than Impreza 1995, no? Integrale is same spec and era but quite a lot faster I suspect.
  16. Assuming it's allowed to post here about the DLC rather than only spam Subaru photos... Regarding the classes. So the Legacy will go in Group A and S4 into 2000cc? Are these cars fast enough to compete in their classes? Wouldn't want another 240Z, a great car that no one drives because it is too slow for its class. The S4 especially seems a bit of a mismatch competing against much newer and more advanced WRC cars like Citroen C4.
  17. Lest we forget... promo screenshot: vs. real game: promo screenshot: vs. real game:
  18. From the screenshots it seemed like Finland would be crystal clear with no fog at all. Remains to be seen if the real DR2.0 Scotland looks like that. Could be a lot worse in the real game. IF it's that level then it's more than bad enough. The visual appearance of the upcoming Perth and Kinross does belong in this thread, and I for one am kind of concerned the fog will ruin its looks, since Codies have this bizarre mentality that adding a thick fog a short distance away from your car is a good way to increase performance in clear weather
  19. The "mist" is an undesired effect. Looks awful and nothing at all like reality. The mist isn't just at longer draw distances, in some places it appears like 10-20m from your car. Or 100m from your car which is not a long draw distance in 2020. In some places you can't see the road because of this "mist". Again at a very short draw distance. On dusk or sunset you can see pretty far, no mist. Then in daytime you can't see squat. REALLY does not add up.
  20. No fog/haze/mist effect for performance reasons. Clear and realistic visuals must not be compromised, only add as much eye candy as you can without sacrificing that. High graphical fidelity with the looks ruined by an ugly and unrealistic haze effect is completely bass-ackwards and counter-productive. If photorealistic visuals require less high-res textures or high-poly assets then so be it, overall it'll look far better A proper FOV and seat position adjust like in sims such as AC. The seat position adjust is way too limited, and FOV changes in large steps rather than in degrees, and FO
  21. This example here isn't 80-100m away. The distance varies, but in some places (Finland especially) it does appear a very short distance from your car. Besides 80-100m isn't really an unthinkably huge draw distance at this day and age, not even for PS4 and Xbone I'm from a part of the world that appears in DR2.0 with a daytime weather that looks nothing at all like reality. Try to guess.
  22. Yep, blue fog all over the forest again "for performance reasons". At leat they are showing it in screenshots this time, though it remains to be seen if the real game looks like that or if they will make the fog effect even worse. Imagine if there were other ways to ensure good performance than having a thick blue fog a stone's throw away from your car. They could at least give PC options to adjust the severity of the fog effect
  23. In Finland you can barely see the road in what should be crystal clear weather with no fog at all, looks utterly horrible (so bad that Codies can't show screenshots of it), and completely unrealistic and that is coming from someone who lives in Finland. Foggy weather is one thing, but this isn't that. They added a thick fog to clear weather "for performance reasons", they couldn't bother to make it run well on consoles and low-end pc's while looking decent so they downgraded it in the absolute worst way possible that completely ruins daytime Finland. And to add insult to injury they promote it
  24. You seem to be confusing a remaster and a new game. A slightly updated DR2.0 would be the former. The idea with rally as opposed to circuit racing is that you don't memorize every millimeter of the stage but you rely on co-driver pacenotes. That's kind of why you'd want new stages, and a decent amount of unique stages, in a rally game because when you keep driving the same ones enough times then you start to know them from memory
×
×
  • Create New...