Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by bn880

  1. Hello CM, the request is to enable an option/feature so that when using at minimum "Manual" Sequential gearbox there is a way to disable any computer assisted clutch usage to prevent stalling.  So that the clutch is automated only as in real life if required (for gear shifts) but not during launch (or at least not during non HB launch mode), not during slowing or hairpins/lockups.   This should cause the engine to stall if you do things incorrectly or don't clutch in some cases.

    The option could be "Manual Sequential with Clutch" as one solution.  Or another option under assists called "Clutch Stall and Launch Assist" could be added with default ON.


    This request has been made a few times over the months from different users in the DR Discord (random link https://discordapp.com/channels/539778417911005186/547916290833252376/629664815534702622 )

    I'd like to enter it here so it has a better chance of actually materializing.  It seems to have overwhelming support from people who have anything to say about it from my observation.

    Some reasons/justifications to add this:

    1. Realism - Major part of real life rallying, an important skill that catches even the best off guard at times
    2. People who play DR2 and later wish to try the real thing on a training course or as amateur rally will likely find themselves stalling the car a lot
    3. Not super difficult to add considering it mostly exists for H pattern mode AFAIK


    A side suggestion is to remove "Clutch Override" option and have it on all the time (as the clutch override being off doesn't make any sense?).  Or at least don't call it an assist.  But it's just icing.

    • Like 3
    • Agree 4

  2. 1 hour ago, MaXyMsrpl said:

    They tried and they failed.

    They didn't fail.  The FFB is closer to real life than it was in DR1 IMO and based on the discussions above probably also according to SME's.  There is some % of players complaining about it, but as Apple would say, "a small percentage of users".    It's just not so easy to say with FFB that someone failed without providing some actual data (anything concrete) or expert opinion to back it up. 

    Edit: I think what you can claim is that the decision to make more realistic FFB rather than traditional FFB with extra assists and exaggerated effects is not something you like as a gamer.

    • Like 3

  3. 1 hour ago, MaXyMsrpl said:

    I just expect, that after collecting feedback (so involving community into some kind of work), they could inform community about the decision. Instead of that, they pretend they can't see the questions appearing from time to time about promised FFB changes. Answer "we decided to not change it any more" would be at least fair. Especially since it's official support forum, so getting answer from authorized person shouldn't be something extraordinary.


    They might be monitoring it to see how many more different people request specific changes, and what people note in continuing reviews.  Stuff like this often changes priority in dev houses.  I can't really say more on it as I don't know the details of their plans/scheduling.

  4. 6 minutes ago, MaXyMsrpl said:

    Considering bugs in steering wheel support (ie in steering lock implementation) I highly doubt in what you are saying.

    You shouldn't, because I am talking about FFB not steering lock.

    Asking for feedback and then doing absolutely nothing after analyzing it is also common in various industries and government, and is not implicitly wrong.  It's just analysis and decision making.  You might disagree if they do nothing, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't have looked at people's opinions.

  5. 8 hours ago, LibranRabbit said:

    I’m just dumbfounded a company that produces car racing games wants to know how a steering wheel should feel in feedback on dirt from the community? Forget the content, bells and whistles. If you don’t have FFB correct for dirt, you don’t have anything, but a game that is made in the '80’s. Dirt Rally 1 was only good in feedback by using TemplarGFX’s mod on RaceDepartment for FFB and his 4K mod etc...I would suggest CM study AutoMobilista, rF2 and AssettoCorsa, using at the least, Fanatec V2 for the sort of fine detailed, low feedback that is available, that everyone is looking for. Provide that and with all of the content, bells and whistles and not only will you stop all the complaints, but will get the accolades CM have been looking for. Everyone wins.

    You listed a lot of track sims there.  And one of the reasons CM is asking for feedback is to know what exactly people think/feel is missing.  From a general perspective I think they have enough feedback from their SME's (drivers) to know the current FFB is in a reasonable enough shape to be considered good enough.  

    Another point is that just because the market has been doing X for 10 years, doesn't mean it's 100% correct.  Even if people got used to it.  Anyway, blaming a company for asking for constructive  feedback about a feature is really not reasonable at all.

  6. It is interesting @danielofifi to me as well. But where is the truth?  It's hard to judge this but for sure one side is more right than the other.

    What I will say though that at least when Jon A. was asked about the realism at the end of the eSports WRC8 championship, you could see he didn't really feel it was that realistic to his R5 and older WRC car experience, as he had to hold his tongue and then say in the end it's fairly realistic.   

    So unless you can have data logs to compare to on same stages, you kind of have to rely on people who have the real life experience.  And then, you have to appreciate whether you are getting an honest opinion as well...

    • Like 1
    • Agree 1

  7. 1 hour ago, Mike Dee said:

    Much easier to allow for all of these camera tweaks when you lock the game to 30fps on consoles, and your PC version struggles to handle any performance above 60fps without constant stutters.

    Take your pick, more tweaks and ****** fidelity, or less tweaks but much higher fidelity overall

    And when you lock the cabin FOV to an artificial value no matter what the external FOV is.

    • Agree 1

  8. On 9/3/2019 at 10:59 AM, AadHofman said:

    It appears that VR implementation, after the update, blocks UDP output. SimHub doesn't work either. 


    For anyone else reading:  This is because a new XML is created for VR in this folder Documents/My Games/Dirt Rally 2.0/hardwaresettings/hardware_settings_config_vr.xml     (same as the other config)

    Which requires setting up the UDP output same as the regular XML.

  9. 22 minutes ago, nasoduko said:

    1.and here we call you kolobithroksila 

    Who do you call that, whatever it means?  The people who invented cars and computers?     (this is the last thing I am saying to you)

    • Haha 1

  10. 1 hour ago, SquirrelEsquire said:


    Seriously though- Your concerns are shared with most of us. It's difficult because the majority of players don't post on the forums, and the majority of developer resources are focused towards new content and acquiring new players from that hidden majority. As a result, the voices of some people seem disproportionately louder in comparison to the general consensus.

    It's frustrating because DR 2.0 is the best Rally game out there, yet the popularity of the genre doesn't seem to justify a close relationship between players and developers. That's probably because DR 2.0 has a skeleton crew of staff working on it in comparison to titles like GRID which have such a wider appeal.

    I think we'd all like to see some more community cohesiveness when it comes to the most pressing issues that need to be addressed, then maybe the developers would take us more seriously. (Just look at the asphalt debate, it's entirely subjective and seldom ever has anything useful that developers could look into. Meanwhile the issues such as FoV and co-pilot calls; where people have gathered data & have specific implementable change requests, get eclipsed).


    2. There is a close relationship between the developer and gamers.  They post here reasonably often, they review important issues and PJ passes on most relevant things to the team(s).  And it's getting better not worse.  (have you not seen the last patch, it was addressing most things that the community told them about here?)

    3. The tarmac issue actually something they looked at even though it was subjective, and they identified factual things that could be improved and are not correct.  The way to solve the subjective opinionated problem pieces is to fall back on science/data/SME's wherever possible.  And in case of handling it can for the most part be done that way.  So that's fine, it's a matter of resource investment to get it changed.

    4. FOV changes aren't really getting eclipsed.  Co-driver calls have been addressed where the feedback has made obvious sense.  To revise ALL notes for ALL stages as some people suggest is another huge expenditure which is why it isn't happening.  This is something you can know without working inside CM.

    EDIT 5.  The only real thing you are actually complaining about is that the number of resources allocated to improving the game has been lower than you would like.  If there were 3x as many "man" hours assigned to improvements/fixes, we'd just see a lot more stuff fixed.  But anyway, the way the Steam Oculus thing was resolved says they aren't exactly a skeleton crew.


    • Agree 4

  11. 21 minutes ago, Snakety said:

    Your RDA seems pretty cool but I can't import the logs in MoTeC. "This Version of i2 only supports Pro enabled files". Maybe, there is a version mismatch. The i2 version you suggest in the readme is not available anymore.

    Yeah, check RaceDepartment for it 🙂

  12. You can't be serious about #2.  Doing something in a production environment is not the same as you changing configs in a camera tool  with practically no QA.  You have no idea just how badly your adjustments may have been chopped up by the QA department.


     But anyway, yeah it sucks that some stuff is locked down, I definitely agree on that point.  Does it mean the game is bad or worthless, certainly not!


    On your last comment: if you don't want to pay for it, don't play it.  If you play it, you should pay it.

    • Agree 3

  13. 49 minutes ago, nasoduko said:

    -some of them yes and they wont say it ,you must see the forest and not the tree 

    Some do but definitely not all actors who defend the game.  It's a minority of people, for the most part people who participate in testing the game get it for free.  AFAIK

    49 minutes ago, nasoduko said:

    For example I think you and watzcoc keep requesting that the dash cam can be adjusted position wise.

    -i asked for it ,but i dont care ,what i care is to unlocked the cams on locked cars so i can fix the cam i want 

    But you don't listen to logic.  That's the problem.

    -so my request for up and down option isnt logical , but flags and end and start sign that destroy your car is ?

    No, the signs are nonsense, and your request is logical.  The illogical thing is not understanding that you can't move a dashcam much while allowing head rotation as then you will get clipping which isn't accepted by QA standards.   They would have to go over each car with a fine comb and decide on the dashcam limits just like they did with (I assume) the head cam.  It's so much work for them that they most likely won't do it for DR2 for free.  But your request and the others are still here, and on other threads, so developers can see them.   Always their decision.

    49 minutes ago, nasoduko said:

    and at last .i have been a surveyor on street constraction ,i have driven cars on roads you can imazine also with speed on gravel just because i could ,on situations before the tarmac condition you are crossing now with your car, also i drive on championships on other race sim games ,been a tester for laser scanned tracks on another game and been a pro. driver on tarmac here in Greece , my skin is on RaceDepartment ,


    their voices are wispers ,i want CM to hear me to change some of their mistakes but as long there are people that see the mistakes as great job ,the time will pass and you will pay for dirt 3.0


    Oh yeah, well CM hears your comments anyway, they just don't if you start to get overly offensive to people.  Generally if you get rude (or anyone does) the content of the message is ignored by most employees, other than whatever rudeness comes across. 🙂

  14. 4 hours ago, nasoduko said:

    i dont care about likes mate ,im just saying what bothers me to the game ,with my way,but on everygame there are companys sucker,s that find everything beautiful,i play 2k20 to. but i dont care ,just as many people here feels the way i do ,but they dont talk cause they dont care or know that they will be company lovers that will get the same attitude just like i do ,companys lovers that they play cool but only in here ,on real life ,they are tiny spots who think they do have a life .and get a dirt2.0 for free ,


    thats all folks ...

    you can die in peace i wont speak for this game ,but i wont buy it again also,god bless the crackers..

    I haven't read all your posts but you sound like you've been abused pretty badly by people who like the game, and I mean VERY badly.   Have you been oppressed that much from sharing your opinion on the faults in the game?   If you come across as sounding like a *****, like a few posts that I read in this thread, then I think you're getting exactly what you deserve from "company lovers" as you put it.   Most of the people you are talking to don't get the game for free, they do like the game more than the faults and respect the company that made it yes.

    Of course there are problematic sympathizers for all games, I will give you that, where they try to silence constructive feedback and use their social media status to achieve that.  I just haven't been seeing a lot of that here.   For example I think you and watzcoc keep requesting that the dash cam can be adjusted position wise.  I have told you both why this isn't (most likely) going to happen from a logical perspective, not a CM lover perspective, and not because you requested something versus someone else.  But you don't listen to logic.  That's the problem.