Jump to content

warpengage

Members
  • Content Count

    1,000
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by warpengage

  1. warpengage

    Something is coming closer...

    All content revealed, or only a partial reveal?
  2. warpengage

    DiRTy Gossip

    Fixed.
  3. warpengage

    Something is coming closer...

    Considering the car that's been revealed in the teaser, who wants a modern recreation of this:
  4. warpengage

    DiRTy Gossip

    I don't know where RallyMobil gets their specs from but, either those are not R5 (just based on the actual R5s) cars, and are custom for that championship, or those are R5 cars and they got a bunch of specs wrong. 210 hp? More like 280. 350 nm of torque? More like 450. And, definitely, not 6-speed gearboxes. If you wanted to know for sure, why didn't you go directly to the FIA or, better yet, the manufacturers of the cars? These are customer cars, so specs are available online for everyone to see. It's better to read information from the grapevine, rather than from the grapes.
  5. warpengage

    DiRTy Gossip

    R5 cars are all 5-speed, what are you talking about? To make the class cost-effective, R5 regulations force manufacturers to use several standard parts, one of which is a Sadev 5-speed sequential transmission, engineered specifically for the class. If you want to homologate a car to R5 specs, you cannot have any other transmission.
  6. warpengage

    Something is coming closer...

    In terms of stage aesthetic, a Scotland rally would be a little underwhelming. It's basically Wales rally but set further north on the same island. Terrain, hazards, trees, look too similar.
  7. WRC 8 uses mostly made-up roads, made to have the feel of the country their are set in. DiRT Rally 2.0 uses almost entirely real roads which, if they are wide in real life, they'll be wide in-game. Just because it's a rally stage, it isn't always 1-inch-clearance kind of narrow. Case in point:
  8. warpengage

    Something is coming closer...

    Yeah, but PJ put the entire era out of question, sadly. Oh well, we pick up what we can get.
  9. warpengage

    DiRTy Gossip

    To be fair, due to class balancing for competitive racing, this is true for any car in the game, to a degree. The early 2000s cars aren't really supposed to keep up with the late 2000s cars, but they do. It's a BOP that has to be done due the class structure that makes appearance and sound the only obvious differences. The only class that lets you carry up to 4 spare tires. Make use of that extra room in the back.
  10. warpengage

    DiRTy Gossip

    Since the 2010's WRCs are still out of the question, let's build an envious 2000-2010 WRC collection. Is that model car detailed enough for you to scan it into the game 😉?
  11. warpengage

    DiRTy Gossip

    A new generation model is definitely not a facelift. A facelift was what M-Sport did with its Fiesta WRC half-way through the 2014 season. New front end and barely anything mechanical. Different ball game with the new Fiesta R5, doesn't even sound the same.
  12. warpengage

    DiRTy Gossip

    Don't forget it's little brother, the R2. It's apparently also a very good car.
  13. warpengage

    Something is coming closer...

    And, to prove my point, there it is. Oh well. I hope we get a new R5, or two, and maybe an R2. Namely the new Fiestas and the Hyundai's return. Although I wonder if, due to e-sports, those classes are updateable at all.
  14. warpengage

    Something is coming closer...

    I'm not holding my breath. When I get excited about these things they don't happen. How nice would it be to have a class of 2010's WR*hit by WRC Promoter*... sorry, "Up to 1600cc" class.
  15. warpengage

    Why "New England" and not "Washington"?

    It's pretty much due to licensing. If the bomb that can explode is a massive nuke, you may want to stay as far as possible from the blast zone, even if you're already out of the danger zone, in theory. It's kind of dumb that this whole problem has to exist. I mean, aren't these stages just public roads and, therefore, public domain? I can understand the WRC copyrighting something like 'El Condor', because it's a name given by an event associated with the championship. But copyrighting the road itself? Did the WRC buy the land? You should be able to use the road under any other name, just don't call it 'El Condor'.
  16. warpengage

    Something is coming closer...

    Similar engines I'd wager?
  17. warpengage

    DiRTy Gossip

    2017 cars are impossible because they belong to the regulation set currently in use for World Rally Cars. 1.6 liters, from 2016 and before, is probably as far as they can go because they've been retired from WRC competition. When I look at the Mini Countryman with the DiRT Rally 2.0 livery, I always think that maybe, just maybe, that car has a bit of an extra tie in with the game. I would love to see that class make it.
  18. warpengage

    DiRTy Gossip

    Sadly no new sounds in this patch yet. But I'm sure it'll be worth the wait.
  19. warpengage

    Something is coming closer...

    New cars and locations confirmed. No need to use "[redacted]" for something already in game 😉 .
  20. warpengage

    DiRTy Gossip

    @PJTierney Patch notes today or next week with the update?
  21. warpengage

    DiRTy Gossip

    Does anyone know if we're still expecting an update to the Skoda Fabia WRC's engine sound?
  22. You really like hyperbole, don't you? And cool it with the tone as I wasn't being rude to you. It's not military software, but it's also not open-source. Any company that develops closed-source software will do their best to protect their work and, most certainly, will avoid giving away details about their proprietary technology in a space like a public forum. Common sense. Also, if everyone could easily figure out how everything works in a game, just by buying and looking through it, makes me wonder why do they even bother encrypting their files. How do you know that there are countless things that could be done, in their specific case? Have you been there trying to diagnose the problem yourself? Subjective. To me, the fog is acceptable. Probably because they'd done what they could within an acceptable time frame. They did show screenshots. They may not have shown the fog but, when you are trying to sell a product, you show it in the best light. Like it or not, it's Advertising 101 for any business. It's also worth noting, on this point, that video showcasing the fog was out prior to the DLC's release. So you can't say there wasn't media available to show you those conditions. That is probably one of those too technical explanations. I don't know how, you don't know how. We'd have to see how things work internally to understand the decision. Possibly because they spent those two months trying to figure out a way to make Finland work, without the fog, thus avoiding the need to give that response. Unfortunately is wasn't possible to do better. If they had, straight-up, said they couldn't do anything, they'd probably get criticized for not even trying and they would be hit with backlash anyway, not from you but others. They can't win. Again, subjective. Some players indeed. Not that many to be fair. Counting those involved in this thread, and the "How to avoid Finland" thread, you have about 10-12 posters. Not that high of a number to be of concern.
  23. They've given the reason now: performance optimisation. That's all they can tell you, as any more explanation would require showing code for a proprietary engine, which is a no-no in the competitive game-development industry. EDIT: And even if they explained more, without showing code directly, the details of how things needed to be optimised in a certain way could certainly give clues to as to how their tech works.
  24. While I understand the frustration behind a feature not working the way we like it, too many folks always say "That's not how it should be done, it should be done this way", "it's an easy fix", "it's lazy", etc etc. Truth is, though, without the source code in front of you and you actually coming face-to-face with the challenges they are trying overcome at Codemasters, you can't know if it's lazy, if it's an easy fix or if there is a better way to do things. Maybe they've tried your ideas for a better way and it wasn't enough. Maybe it could be done another way but it's infeasible, at this point, to do it because the code rewrite would be too extensive and planning can't foresee everything. We, viewing things from the outside, often have superficial views of issues. I remember a friend being asked why a button on a webpage wasn't just a little bit more to the left side of the page. All he said he could think of, in his mind, was: "If you knew how much of a pain in the butt it was to get that to where it is right now, you'd know why."
  25. Noice! Glad to see rain coming to Finland.
×