Jump to content

DiRTy Gossip about WRC8

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Pfei said:

The problem is that in that supposed beta video of Argentina you don't know who's driving, how hard he's pushing or if he is using assists. 

I even doubt the credibility of that video being that it's from an unknown source. It seems to me to be an unintentional leak of an internal dev build. In every way possible it looks 10x worse than the alfa from the live stream two months ago. 

It doesn't matter who's driving a car if you can clearly see that it has too much grip compared to reality. Also, in simulation type of games, such as Dirt Rally 2.0 and WRC 8, assists do not increase the ammount of grip. If you did some testing in Dirt Rally 2.0 you would know that they actually make the cars go slower, because all they do is limit and modulate the ammount of input, applied by a player, to make the cars easier to drive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Pfei said:

The problem is that in that supposed beta video of Argentina you don't know who's driving, how hard he's pushing or if he is using assists. 

I even doubt the credibility of that video being that it's from an unknown source. It seems to me to be an unintentional leak of an internal dev build. In every way possible it looks 10x worse than the alfa from the live stream two months ago. 

Agreed. Whoever was driving - wasn’t doing well. Inverse apex’s, no power out of corners, no effective use of handbrake to keep the car’s attitude pointing in the direction of travel etc.

All I am saying is that the verdict on the game’s handling attributes or lack thereof need to be assessed once the game is released. Sure we can take away or surmise reality but it’s all in vain as watching a video (while somewhat telltale) - only offers up part of the truth.

Edited by Buckwilder
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look how the Citroen "bleeds" speed in every corner ....................IMHO has no "weight" at all , loses momentum way too quick and then just chucking it straightens it out right away ,aka not real life 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/9/2019 at 5:24 AM, wfwr26 said:

If WRC can get the physics and ffb right, its going to be a great game.  They are claiming to be overhauling both as well as the co-driver.  For me its a must buy.  Just look at the jump from WRC-6 to what we are seeing as an alpha in WRC-8. The stages we've got to see look incredible. Instead of bashing these games guys, its more like what a great time to be alive that we will have hopefully more than one awesome rally game. I wish DR2.0 had some form of modern top tier rally car, but they dont. Heck we cant even get the 2010 class from DR1.  WRC is going to have what 14-15 locations with 100 stages?  And they are going to have historical cars in the game as well.  Not bashing codies here, but they better get the issues sorted because it looks like a worthy opponent is finally showing up. Heck their rain effects already look better than the glaucoma ridden rain in dr.  I like how they dont have the rain drops on the screen like a mid 90s sega genesis game. 

NIGHT NOODLES! is what we call the rain in DR 2

 

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MC looks very pretty. physics from chase cams look quite arcadey compared to DR2.0. I'm not saying that as a criticism - I've mostly played arcade racing games so I'd be down to check this out maybe if it reviews well - it's just what it looks like to me. 

also for the framerate connoisseurs (I'm not one of them,  promise lol) ... I think he mentions it's locked at 30fps

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
24 minutes ago, ianism said:

also for the framerate connoisseurs (I'm not one of them,  promise lol) ... I think he mentions it's locked at 30fps

 

LOL well if that's the case for the consoles, for me that's the end of the story for this game!

30fps is unplayable after Dirt's 60fps standard-setting.

Edit: The comment was actually that 'On the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X, they are aiming for 60fps'

So there is some hope for this. But they really have to get a better co-driver than some barking colonel cobbled together from WW1 newsreel audio.

 

Edited by Jake Cushing
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Jake Cushing said:

Edit: The comment was actually that 'On the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X, they are aiming for 60fps'

So there is some hope for this. But they really have to get a better co-driver than some barking colonel cobbled together from WW1 newsreel audio.

ok, thanks. couldn't be bothered to go watch again to check.

and ugh totally he is awful. it's not 2003 anymore, get someone who doesn't sound like a football commentator.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, ianism said:

MC looks very pretty. physics from chase cams look quite arcadey compared to DR2.0. I'm not saying that as a criticism - I've mostly played arcade racing games so I'd be down to check this out maybe if it reviews well - it's just what it looks like to me. 

also for the framerate connoisseurs (I'm not one of them,  promise lol) ... I think he mentions it's locked at 30fps

 

Camera view and FOV looks perfect. Graphically very nice as well but 30fps on consoles means im out unless they can hit 60 on Pro & X 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't mind 30 fps as long as the handling model is good enough. SLRE was in 30 fps but the handling was so good (especially on tarmac) that I still come back to the game from time to time.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks pretty awful here imo. The sound is just terrible. 

  • Disagree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Decks said:

Looks pretty awful here imo. The sound is just terrible. 

Too foggy, The sound doesnt seem that bad. The pops crackles and bangs are much better done than in Dirt. 

Edited by FLAW3D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks pretty decent arcade rallying, however I´m too old for that :classic_dry:
Co-driver could take his gasmask off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

game is looking great to me. i love the new dynamic weather. also love how they've modeled wear for each individual tire. even in WRC7 the tire wear was much better done than in DR2.0. not sure why they got that guy to do the co-driver calls, it sounds terrible, but i do really like how the co-driver gives you much more information than the co-driver in DR2.0. i never really had any problems with the calls in WRC7 but in DR2.0 the calls are hugely problematic. 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Tranzitive said:

in DR2.0 the calls are hugely problematic. 

Steady on with the hyperbole man. There are a few calls that are too late, or have incorrect severity, but the vast majority of them are perfectly fine.

  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When Dirt Rally 2 first came out, I went back and forth between that and WRC 7. Once I got used to the car handling of DR2, I couldn’t go back to WRC anymore. With the latter, I always turn the car too early because I was anticipating forward momentum that was not there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@gk9147 I think the WRC 8 stuff belongs here.

Regarding the 100+ stages, it looks like Kylotonn has borrowed a move from Codemasters' playbook by stitching stages together. 

Argentina has two stages which are reversed to make four in total. Then they stitch those two forward stages together and also reverse it to get two long stages. So "six" stages in total. 

That is unacceptable. I hate that in the DiRT Rallies and I'm sad to see another dev doing it. 

There is hope that it won't be like that throughout the game, however. Chile has four stages which are reversed, to make eight stages. No stage stitching in Chile. However the Chile stages look to all be 8km or less. 

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Pfei said:

@gk9147 I think the WRC 8 stuff belongs here.

Regarding the 100+ stages, it looks like Kylotonn has borrowed a move from Codemasters' playbook by stitching stages together. 

Argentina has two stages which are reversed to make four in total. Then they stitch those two forward stages together and also reverse it to get two long stages. So "six" stages in total. 

That is unacceptable. I hate that in the DiRT Rallies and I'm sad to see another dev doing it. 

There is hope that it won't be like that throughout the game, however. Chile has four stages which are reversed, to make eight stages. No stage stitching in Chile. However the Chile stages look to all be 8km or less. 

Pfei, let's be a little fair here and look from their perspective. We all want more stages, but we also want them to be of high fidelity. For this to happen, the game will have to be in development longer, because technology for accurate-to-life stage building still requires a lot of manual work. Some fans don't want to wait that long and it may not be financially sustainable, for the companies, not to release a title for a such a long period of time.

Think of a triangle with the following vertices: short dev-time, high amount of assets, high quality of assets. You can only pick two. It's how it currently works.

There's the 'Your Stage'-type generator, which was supposed to address this lack of unique kilometers, in rally games, but there were enough people preferring purpose built stages for them to ditch that system. They can't win.

Hiring more people to work on more stages could also be in the cards, but that may not financially feasable for these companies either.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@warpengage I'm not whining about content. I'm whining about stage stitching. It's an unrealistic marketing ploy.

If Argentina only has four stages, so be it. Don't try to create two more out of thin air by gluing them together at the ends. 

What's worse: saying you have 100 stages and players realizing it's achieved by stage stitching, or having 75 stages and players thinking "what great stages"? 

The former is worse IMO. 

Although I do understand that most people don't research games like we do, hence the marketing ploy to excite unwary customers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Pfei said:

@warpengage I'm not whining about content. I'm whining about stage stitching. It's an unrealistic marketing ploy.

If Argentina only has four stages, so be it. Don't try to create two more out of thin air by gluing them together at the ends. 

What's worse: saying you have 100 stages and players realizing it's achieved by stage stitching, or having 75 stages and players thinking "what great stages"? 

The former is worse IMO. 

Although I do understand that most people don't research games like we do, hence the marketing ploy to excite unwary customers. 

I, like you, and other informed players would gladly take a lower stage count because we know the work that goes into them and that they'll be of great quality. Like you said, though, people will just see a number of stages and if said number doesn't impress them enough, it's low effort. That's the unfortunate reality behind the padding.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Pfei said:

@warpengage I'm not whining about content. I'm whining about stage stitching. It's an unrealistic marketing ploy.

If Argentina only has four stages, so be it. Don't try to create two more out of thin air by gluing them together at the ends. 

What's worse: saying you have 100 stages and players realizing it's achieved by stage stitching, or having 75 stages and players thinking "what great stages"? 

The former is worse IMO. 

Although I do understand that most people don't research games like we do, hence the marketing ploy to excite unwary customers. 

I find reversing stages way more infuriating than stage stitching. 

Im praying Codies are not going to be reversing tracks for the up n coming GRID. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

to be fair, driving a stage in reverse is quite different from running it forwards. so I have no issue with including the reversed versions of stages. plus, if it was me that had spent all those hours modelling the landscapes, buildings, crowds, & etc, I would like it if people got to see it from as many angles as possible!

that said, pretending like you have 100 unique stages when really it's just 50 isn't really fair.

like, several of the locations in DR2.0 are just one real-life stage cut into two - Spain, Argentina and New Zealand are the ones I can think of off the top of my head... they're pretending it's 2-4 stages when really it's just one (admittedly, long) one.

Edited by ianism
  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×