Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by BrySkye

  1. Never underestimate the creativity of Belgians. :lol: If there is a way, we will find it.
    Can hardly forget a certain Fin though.

    “I almost burned my legs and hands while doing it. I throttled the engine by hand. Smoke was coming from my gloves so I had to change hands frequently. But I didn´t give up, no matter how much it hurt.”
    Who says bonnet cam is unrealistic?
    In one of @KickUp s absolute fav cars too. Get yourself an Action Man and a little wireless camera for POV and he can live this with his RC Delta.

    (Haven't been drunk over New Year or anything fun. After getting the hell out of here for a while, decided that after a good lunch, the 1st was a good day to format my PC and swap out the 4TB HDD for a 4TB SSHD and replace the useless 16GB Cache SSD with a 1TB SSD then give it all a complete reformat. Only just about getting back up to speed now thanks to some complications, but my is a freshly formatted PC and Windows install nice once you've gotten everything updated and things reinstalled).
    Sidenote: EVGA, why on earth would you put those little clear sticker things on the fans of your GPU? No benefit and so easy to miss. They've been in my PC for nearly two years before the compressed air blew them off.

  2. sqdstr said:
    *grabs some more popcorn*

    yeah keep it coming guys :smile: 
    Nope. completely done because there's nothing more to add.
    I see the exact problem, where Kev's decided to interpret it simply as the S1 being Audi's internal designation and E2 as the WRC one, hence "S1/E2".
    That they are just two names for one single car.

    Problem with that is the fact the original Audi Sport Quattro S1 competed in 1984 and was a very different car from the one that appeared in 85.
    If you ignore the existence of the original S1, then it suddenly makes sense why you would think it's obvious and straight forward to think like that.

    Even the Wiki article refers to the original S1.

    The only reason this started was it then goes on to describe the E2 as the S1 E2

  3. KevM said:
    Its daft to argue the Audi though.  It was known as both the S1 (by Audi)  and E2 (by the governing body who told Audi to refer to it as E2 also, so they did).  Why there's an issue calling it both, baffles me.  Its the same car
    Why you want to insist that the problem is in calling both cars S1 is what baffles me, because that was never even brought up until you threw in your hat.
    Why it could be an issue though is that the S1 is also a different car. That's the crux which makes doing so a bit wonky. The Audi Sport Quattro that appeared in 1984 is also the S1. The homologation states that plain as day.
    If you want to call two different cars the exact same name, that's your prerogative. 
    E2 is just more specific to differentiate between the original 84 S1 and the 1985 evolution car.

    This only started when it was said that "S1 E2" was the official designation for the mad Quattro which was more wing than car.
    But it never was. Audi have never used it themselves, though just about everyone else has. The problem is S1 E2 makes damn good sense on the face of things. 
    Unfortunately, being straightforward doesn't make it technically correct. It's a designation that has never been used in any official capacity, and when you know how the evolution regulations worked it becomes pretty understandable why it isn't S1 E2.
    That you couldn't evolve an evolution, and the S1 was indeed already an evolution.
    Yet it's become common because calling two different cars S1 is both confusing and just a bit silly.
    S2 would also have been fine, and that was probably the original intent, just like the earlier A1 and A2.
    S1 84 and S1 85 have also become common alternatives to try and differentiate between them.
    That's how messed up the naming of the car has become.

    Saying as the 85 car was officially entered into the WRC as the Audi Sport Quattro E2, that is simply the most appropriate designation to differentiate it from the 84 car which was entered as the Audi Sport Quattro S1.

    It's only as confusing as anyone chooses to make it.
    Gotta hand it to you Kev, you do a hell of a job of turning what was one little correction of a mere 3 lines into all this pointlessness.

  4. Since you missed it again.

    "This is in line with the way Audi Sport referred to them in their press releases."

    So, just for the sake of clarity, Audi have apparently used both.
    Don't pretend Audi have never used the E2 designation, nor try to change the direction away from the actual thing being addressed was the "S1 E2" designation, rather than just "S1" or just "E2".
    If anything it would be the S1 E1, because it would have been the first evolution of the S1.
    But the S1 itself was an evolution, which is why that designation doesn't hold water.
    You know, even more crazy, Audi are also capable of making mistakes as well. That's one of the problems with this particular example, there is a lot of conflicting info even in official sources, which is why you have to delve into it so deeply. The 22b comparison is perfectly apt. It's all in the fine technicalities.

    It's nice that you'd like to act as if I'm the one who's upset though. :) No skin off my back if you want to disagree with someone like John Davenport.

  5. KevM said:
    Audi refer to the E2 as the S1 though...

    Audi Motorsport said:
    1986 Winner of Pikes Peak hillclimb race (Audi Sport quattro S1)

    The above linked article is as clear as mud.  
    Though, if its true that the 'E2' couldn't 'mix and match' with the earlier car, then B264 (1984 homologation) actually refers to earlier cars (1st Evolution - non S1) and suggests that the S1/E2 are actually the same, with S1 being Audi's reference and the E2 being FIA's reference to the same 1985 homologated vehicle.

    So the only thing missing from Wiki's S1 E2 is a ' / '

    The car we have in-game is an Audi Sport Quattro

    Think the mud is in your eyes as much as the article. :P ...Well, guess it depends on how used you are to having to interpret anything the FIA puts out.
    Had FISA not insisted on how the evolutions would be designated after the S1 had competed, the car we know as the E2 would probably have been designated the S2 by Audi. They were forced to call it the E2, but call it the E2 they did.
    He consistently refers to the second evolution as the “E2”. This is in line with the way Audi Sport referred to them in their press releases and the way that that they were referred to internally at FISA. I know that because in those years I sat on the FISA Homologation Commission representing the manufacturers.
    But hey, feel free to disagree and do things your own way, we're more than used to that by now. :)

    The real point though is that the commonly seen designation "S1 E2" does not officially exist and that specific designation is one Audi have never used.

  6. Jepsertti said:
    phil94ma said:
    "Thanks to the success of the Audi R8 Ultra 2014, and as a response to the requests of our fans, we are going to replicate the brand new R8 Ultra 2016. The new amazing Audi car will not come alone, since we are also working on the Audi R18 E-Tron, TT VLN 2014, TT CUP 2015, A1 S1, Sport quattro S1 E2 and TT 2015 models."
    That's easy then. They are making a fictional car, so they don't need a license :p Remember, it's Quattro S1 and Quattro E2, not Quattro S1 E2 ;) I learnt my mistake, now I'm keeping the proper naming.
    The official name is Audi Quattro S1 E2.
    It's not. :p Amazingly enough, Wiki is wrong.
    Rather more detailed, sourced account including where the misconception came from.

    As for the car being in AC, not so weird given the E2 was put into Forza 4, a game which also lacked any real form of off-road racing.
    Yet was absent from Forza Horizon where it was more relevant.

  7. RookieOne said:
    Perhaps for old timers who now know better

    But for the new ones ? I think they will recognize more the ST185

    In Gran Turismo, the 185 is well known for being the only rally car with in Safari Trim.
    In Forza Motorsport, it's the same thing, only car from a rallying heritage that can be modded to safari trim, is the ST185
    In forza Horizon, the recommended car for Rallying from toyota is the ST185

    I think that in the last few years, the ST185 has became more recognizable than we think
    Let me throw that right back at you. The 185 in Gran Turismo is still a 'standard' model, even in GT6.
    It's still basically the PS2 model from GT4.
    The 205 was one of the first cars to be given the premium treatment in GT5, with the full interior and all the graphical bells and whistles.
    There is absolutely no doubt which car Polyphony Digital put the love into.

    It's the 205 in DiRT and DiRT 3. The one in Sega Rally Revo and it's arcade reworks Sega Rally 3 and Sega Rally Arcade Online.

    You're right it's the only one in Forza that can be modded into safari trim and recommended for rally trim in Horizon, but you know why?
    Because the 185 wasn't included in the release version of Forza Horizon. It was part of the Rally Expansion pack.
    The 205 was absent from Horizon (though has always been present in the main series) but is back in Horizon 2.

    SLRE is the first time the 185 has been given proper prominence since CMR2005, so let's not pretend the 185 is suddenly the more favoured car in games.

    Hate to tell you this, but the Celica ZZT231 is more recognised in gaming than the 185. That's the second most prominent Celica in the likes of GT, Forza, NFS, etc after the 205.

  8. RookieOne said:
    True enough, but the 205 have a tainted legacy because of the cheating incident.

    the 185 and the 165 does not, they actually look way cooler than the 205 and actually dominated for a while (especially the 185) in the hands of Sainz, Auriol and Kankunnen.
    To big rally fans, sure, but not so much to gamers. There's a reason why the 205 is the most popular one in games, even though it was the subject of the cheating that got Toyota banned.
    It's the icon in spite of that.
    You're perfectly entitled to your opinion about the 165 and 185 looking cooler, but I'd never agree. I think they look pretty generic in comparison. 
    Sega Rally was my first experience of rally almost exactly 20 years ago. In fact, it was exactly 20 years and 4 days since I got my Sega Saturn and very soon after tried the Sega Rally playable demo and owned the full game by February.
    It was the inspiration for so many games, including Colin McRae Rally, making it the de facto Celica by default to many people.
    The most popular and recognisable cars aren't always the most successful.

  9. RookieOne said:
    Or the Celica ST165 and/or the ST185 (the ST165 would be fun, since it actually had a manually lockable center diff, which would probably translate in-game as being unlocked on tarmac stage and locked on snow and gravel stages or as having only 2 settings : locked and unlocked)
    The 205 was in Sega Rally though.
    That's all that really needs to be said. :)
    That and Codies already have a compatible source file for the 205.

    Apparently a redundant line of thought anyway though as the people that went to Codies before the game was even announced have made it clear lately that they were told the exact reason why Toyota are not in the game and it's a reason that means they never, ever, will be.

  10. A possibility, but I'd say unlikely for a couple of reasons such as paying for the license of a technically incorrect car. This isn't Sega Rally.
    We shouldn't really read too much into internal testing that was basically just done to see what the physics engine can do. It's all par for the course.

    I suspect we'll have something before April. Paul was saying there was lots of exciting things he was bursting to talk about, but just couldn't yet.
    Thus far at least, when it comes to things that weren't explicitly detailed on the road map, like new cars, they typically weren't revealed until 1/2 weeks before release, so there's a ton of scope there.

  11. Let's see, you missed some community awards in the form of names-on-paper shown to the camera.
    Some talk about Sweden and getting the more current cars.
    A handful of questions being answered.
    Some complaints in chat about 'promised' things that were never actually promised (that went on to dominate chat)
    But no real new info or gossip material. It was a very relaxed, shooting the breeze kind of thing.

    Oh, you also missed Festive Paul, who has now practically gone viral on Twitter.

  12. RubyRuby said:
    griev0r said:
    Why aren't the major news sites (minus the horrid PC gamer review) reviewing full release Dirt Rally?  Nothing from IGN, Gamespot, Gametrailers etc.  It could definitely use the exposure!
    It's getting plenty of word-of-mouth advertising - highly thought of on the pCARS site, for instance.

    On another note:  looks so far like the Bandai Namco plan for the DVD distribution will be zip for North American vendors again.  Anybody got anything to the contrary?
    Bandai Namco's deal with Codemasters has expired..
    Codemasters signed a new publishing deal last month with Koch-Media for global distribution, including the Americas, for 2016 instead.

  13. Think you're reading way too much into that. 
    You don't become a 'developer' over night.

    It's far more likely that they were a full time reviewer, but for some time now have just done the occasional bit of freelance, which is a common enough practice. 
    I doubt this is going to have any actual repercussions on the PC Gamer side apart from changing Twitter to private.
    They are determined to stand by the review and the statements within it after all.

  14. BrySkye said:
    I'd genuinely love to see some video of trying to drive the Stratos using the same driving style you'd use in a 2010 car.
    Not much needed to imagine that. You'll be spinning in circles on the very first corner xD
    Exactly, which is why I'd like to see it and the subsequent attempt to explain it.

    As a rule, I don't really want discussion of this here to degenerate into some of the less restrained and thoughtful replies/comments to the review elsewhere.
    I'm glad that, thus far, the official Codies DiRT forum is probably the only one that isn't rabid about it.
    For me, it's about trying to figure out and understand how someone came to conclusions that are so at odds with a significant majority.
    A negative review isn't the problem, it's one that seems to hinge on so many statements that just don't seem to have much credibility.

    It's a shame that now, partly because of this, DiRT Rally's metacritic is now lower than DiRT 2. 
    Metacritics always a pretty flawed system from this point of view, but it's still the one the decision makers pay the most attention to.

  15. The talk about an absurd amount of traction control and that a huge amount of it is forced-on is, rightly, causing the most confusion.
    They specifically say all the assists are turned off.
    Personally, I wonder if that's true. If it was checked or had saved (The 'leaving the menu without -applying- changes' oversight)
    It's just too strange to really comprehend otherwise.

    Saying there is barely any difference between the Stratos and a 2010 car, apart from times, is just too far out there to be really taken seriously.
    We can take critique of the handling, just not liking the game, etc, etc.
    ...But using a specific example that the Stratos isn't much different from a 2010 car... I just can't really fathom how someone comes to that conclusion in a true, all assists off, scenario.
    I'd genuinely love to see some video of trying to drive the Stratos using the same driving style you'd use in a 2010 car.

    We have some big handling critiques here with talk of hovercraft and tyres less durable than a Pirelli... 
    But I don't think I've seen it claimed that all the cars handle the same.
    ...With the possible exception of one legendary Russian troll.

    EDIT: Maybe booted up DiRT 3 by mistake?

  16. Meeting the lifetime sales and such is certainly good news, but its also a pretty clear statement on just how low expectations were from the 'folks upstairs', so it's a bit double-edged in that sense. Hopefully it can utterly smash those targets in the longer run, plus maintain it's status as the Codies game with the highest metacritic ever, which are the kind of things they won't ignore, at least in the short term.

    Knowing those business folks though, it won't be long before they start thinking and believing "If it can be so successful like this, imagine how much more successful it will be if it's more casual and accessible!"
    That's what Paul and the team need to be ready to fight, or perhaps that should be 'start fighting all over again'.

    One of the earliest things I said about the Toyota situation was that it might simply not have been worth it from a financial point of view, given the very limited amount of cars they could contribute and their limited relevance compared to others. The need to prioritise getting "bang for the buck" with the games smaller budget, hence perhaps having more Lancia or Ford which were big players throughout all of the eras represented in the game.
    That's looking rather more likely at this point.

    But at least we should be able to stop moaning now that it's because of other games 'stealing' all the cars with exclusive deals which evidently don't exist.

  17. bogani said:
    So, just read a Swedish sites review of DR and the author stated this.

    "When I've heard Codemasters gathered a talented team that includes people that's worked on iRacing and Richard Burns Rally, I started sweating heavily."

    Hmmm, did he just pull this straight from his behind or is there any truth to this?
    He might well have heard it because those rumours definitely went around.

    No truth to them though. IIRC, that was asked on one of the DiRT Shows.
    Y'see, the people at Codies are obviously incapable of making something like DiRT Rally themselves, so they had to get other people in to do it for them.
    That's the theory.