Asphalt physics : GRID (2019) vs DR 2.0

[KolysioN 39]

I'm sorry but the tarmac physics are far better in GRID 2019...in DR2.0 it slides everytime, everywhere, there is zero grip, I prepare a mod to put the physics from GRID 2019 into DR 2.0 🙂, stay tuned on youtube.

Edited January 13 by KolysioN

[gk9147 220]

7 hours ago, KolysioN said:

I'm sorry but the tarmac physics are far better in GRID 2019...in DR2.0 it slides everytime, everywhere, there is zero grip, I prepare a mod to put the physics from GRID 2019 into DR 2.0 🙂, stay tuned on youtube.

just put your rear suspension or / and the rear shock absorbers or / and a more flexible rear anti-roll bar( you have more option for avoid to loose rear ), it lacks the inertia of sliding, in the tarmac of DR2.0 you have the understeer, loose rear, but not good slide inertia control or drift.

to start drifting  normally you do not need to arrive at high speed to drrift .(It's not an obligation)

[SRD_SimVansevenant 863]

On 1/13/2020 at 11:48 PM, KolysioN said:

I'm sorry but the tarmac physics are far better in GRID 2019...in DR2.0 it slides everytime, everywhere, there is zero grip, I prepare a mod to put the physics from GRID 2019 into DR 2.0 🙂, stay tuned on youtube.

So you are one of those modders... Breaking the integrity of the game by modding in cars that aren't suppose to be in the game, tracks-car combos that aren't allowed, and so much more apparently. You and similar modders like you are the reasons we aren't allowed to get our hands on the files for designing liveries for the DLC cars. I believe this to be extremely disrespectful and shameful behaviour. The reason we, honest players and modders, can't have the nice things we deserve... 

[KolysioN 39]

38 minutes ago, SRD_SimVansevenant said:

So you are one of those modders... Breaking the integrity of the game by modding in cars that aren't suppose to be in the game, tracks-car combos that aren't allowed, and so much more apparently. You and similar modders like you are the reasons we aren't allowed to get our hands on the files for designing liveries for the DLC cars. I believe this to be extremely disrespectful and shameful behaviour. The reason we, honest players and modders, can't have the nice things we deserve... 

you are free to do what you do like I do what I do. Call me "the unleasher" (sounds good for a movie 🙂 )

[XenialJ 92]

To many players physics and ACAT mods are a tonne more worthwhile than skins. Physics gets complaints. ACAT has been great in previous games.

If you can't mod liveries, blame the right people instead of saying others shouldn't be allowed to use their toys just so you can use yours.

 

 

 

[SRD_SimVansevenant 863]

16 hours ago, XenialJ said:

To many players physics and ACAT mods are a tonne more worthwhile than skins. Physics gets complaints. ACAT has been great in previous games.

If you can't mod liveries, blame the right people instead of saying others shouldn't be allowed to use their toys just so you can use yours.

I don't break the terms of service by modding the liveries because that is accepted by the developers. Modding physics and putting in ACAT is against the terms of service and should be punished. And I do blame the right people. The DLC cars are locked because of the danger of being made available for free by those modders that break the terms of service like the person above. 

FYI, people complain about the physics because they don't know how the car should behave in real life, how it should be driven to behave that way or they don't know how to create setups to make them behave in a way they want them to behave based on their driving style. The baseline ingame is a descent platform to start from and further refine to your personal style. 

[XenialJ 92]

The TOS are a product of design, not the source. Blame the decisions behind them that really led to the restrictions this time round, and acknowledge that ACAT was an awesome thing in DR1. People got to enjoy it because of a decision someone made that it was allowed. Even online. Blame what changed that for DR2.

I imagine that if the TOS were changed to also say "No liveries" you would think that's a poor rule. The game and experience for many players would suffer for that rule and I doubt you would disagree. 

And if you, already capable of changing liveries without affecting anything online, were to then go ahead and do that I wouldn't call you a bad guy. I would say good on you; you've made the game much cooler for yourself. And should you then make that available to others I would still say good on you; you've brought more joy to many players and the modding scene would be flourishing thanks to the time you put in. And if Codies were to then shut that down because of the TOS, I'd judge the decision-makers behind it, not you.

It's a different story of course if you're deliberately creating a means to effectively pirate. If Codies sold liveries as part of DLC, and you're making liveries freely available, blocking your mod is definitely understandable. Is that what we're talking about here when you condemn ACAT and physics mods? No.

Because ACAT has a respectable history and I guarantee, and you know it, that KolysioN would be pushing ACAT just as much if the DLC restrictions remained just as intact. That broke between DR1 and DR2, and KolysioN wasn't the one who broke it. 

Codies already knew what ACAT was when they designed DR2. They knew people were enjoying it in DR1. Then they went ahead with a system architecture that gets ACAT and DLC tangled up together. So whether your interest be skins or ACAT, that's where you could be directing your disappointment.

This is a thread about physics and I don't even know how you tie physics into it. Rally sim enthusiasts are all about physics mods; they're a part of the legacy of RBR and DR1, and DR2 is a great place, if not the place, for that to continue. What could you hold against people who enjoy that? You want them punished? Are you serious? If being anti-physics-mods really is just you championing the TOS (and maybe it's not, I don't know, you didn't explain further), then it really does just look like a selfish case of "You shouldn't enjoy your mods so I can enjoy mine".

Physics modders didn't break your liveries. Blame the right people.

 

 

And reality isn't why people complain about the physics. Spain is. 

Edited January 16 by XenialJ

[SRD_SimVansevenant 863]

Let's look at it from this perspective:

• Designing liveries doesn't give anyone any advantage over someone else. It's purely cosmetic. = Allowed
• ACAT and physics alterations by community members have the possibility to provide a significant and unfair advantage to certain players. = Not allowed
• They deny access to DLC cars for livery designs because those files also contain all the other elements of the car as well which can lead to piracy and the devs losing revenue. = Not allowed

It's modders that change core elements of gameplay or aspects that endanger revenue that are the reason certain things are no longer put available to the designers who don't mean any harm to the game, especially when their mods are only cosmetic. KolysioN might not have bad intentions with his mod, and others using it might not have, but it creates a situation where others can take advantage of certain aspects of the mod thus getting an unfair advantage in the game. The devs have no control over those mods and what people do with them, and I do understand that they need to protect their product and revenue. I do support an alternate way of encrypting the DLC cars so that the files livery designers need are available (4 of the 24 basically) and encrypt the ones we don't need. If we trace back to the root of the problem why things are not allowed or locked away, we find those modders that create mods offering the possibility of an unfair advantage or endangering their revenue, intentions of the modder not taken into account.   

 

[KolysioN 39]

12 hours ago, SRD_SimVansevenant said:

Let's look at it from this perspective:

• Designing liveries doesn't give anyone any advantage over someone else. It's purely cosmetic. = Allowed
• ACAT and physics alterations by community members have the possibility to provide a significant and unfair advantage to certain players. = Not allowed
• They deny access to DLC cars for livery designs because those files also contain all the other elements of the car as well which can lead to piracy and the devs losing revenue. = Not allowed

It's modders that change core elements of gameplay or aspects that endanger revenue that are the reason certain things are no longer put available to the designers who don't mean any harm to the game, especially when their mods are only cosmetic. KolysioN might not have bad intentions with his mod, and others using it might not have, but it creates a situation where others can take advantage of certain aspects of the mod thus getting an unfair advantage in the game. The devs have no control over those mods and what people do with them, and I do understand that they need to protect their product and revenue. I do support an alternate way of encrypting the DLC cars so that the files livery designers need are available (4 of the 24 basically) and encrypt the ones we don't need. If we trace back to the root of the problem why things are not allowed or locked away, we find those modders that create mods offering the possibility of an unfair advantage or endangering their revenue, intentions of the modder not taken into account.   

 

it's not the mod the problem, it's the user.
A gun is not a problem, it's how you use it, to save a person by killing a murder or just  to murder  ?

 

ACAT, AWAT, and physics mods are designed for the solo experience, to un-restrict the game and finally to have all you the game should be :

AWAT
-rain for finland, fog on/off, night for RX tracks, snow for all tracks.

ACAT
-all cars for any track

And there is so more, like cam extension mods, off-road timer on/off, stay tuned !

Edited January 16 by KolysioN

[ianism 1,316]

9 hours ago, KolysioN said:

it's not the mod the problem, it's the user.
A gun is not a problem, it's how you use it, to save a person by killing a murder or just  to murder  ?

lol that's the worst analogy I've seen in my life. more guns lead to more death. it's a very simple relationship. look at the homicide data for the US versus any other rich country.

[KolysioN 39]

On 1/17/2020 at 8:44 AM, ianism said:

lol that's the worst analogy I've seen in my life. more guns lead to more death. it's a very simple relationship. look at the homicide data for the US versus any other rich country.

again, it's the user the problem, not the gun.

 

[ianism 1,316]

58 minutes ago, KolysioN said:

again, it's the user the problem, not the gun.

sorry, but no. I'm gonna get all pretentious about this for a sec: I have a master's degree in history. I have researched this. I will say this slowly.

you. clearly. do not. know. what. you. are. talking. about.

check out this list for a preliminary example, and sort by Rate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

the US is 89th with a rate of just under 6 per 100,000 people. it is the only rich country in the top 150, and the rate is triple that of the next-highest, which is Canada at 1.8.

sure, not all homicides are with guns, but again, this is just an example.

good day.

Edited January 18 by ianism

[KolysioN 39]

5 hours ago, ianism said:

sorry, but no. I'm gonna get all pretentious about this for a sec: I have a master's degree in history. I have researched this. I will say this slowly.

you. clearly. do not. know. what. you. are. talking. about.

check out this list for a preliminary example, and sort by Rate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

the US is 89th with a rate of just under 6 per 100,000 people. it is the only rich country in the top 150, and the rate is triple that of the next-highest, which is Canada at 1.8.

sure, not all homicides are with guns, but again, this is just an example.

good day.

again the problem is the user, not the gun, and no need master to understand that.
if you use something for your advantage, Don't blame the thing, blame the user, cause perhaps the thing do good with other a different use.....like the gun, it can save people, not only kill, the USER uses the gun, a GUN doesn't work alone...

 

so what the people do with the ACAT or AWAT mod, it's the USER responsability, not the mod creator

Edited January 18 by KolysioN

[Ialyrn 264]

This mod, if released to the public, will unbalance any competative aspect completely; the leaderboards will be an absolute mess. If there is another world series like we had last year, it will cause major issues in trying to find drivers who actually deserve to be there and those who potentially cheated using your physics mod. It will be shambolic. Honestly, I think this thread needs Codemaster staff presence asap!

@PJTierney

[JZStudios 631]

On 1/14/2020 at 4:03 PM, SRD_SimVansevenant said:

So you are one of those modders... Breaking the integrity of the game by modding in cars that aren't suppose to be in the game, tracks-car combos that aren't allowed, and so much more apparently. You and similar modders like you are the reasons we aren't allowed to get our hands on the files for designing liveries for the DLC cars. I believe this to be extremely disrespectful and shameful behaviour. The reason we, honest players and modders, can't have the nice things we deserve... 

What a poor understanding of the discussion. First off, you can have access to the textures without having access to the car model. DR1 did this, and it was fine.

Secondly, nowhere did he mention adding in cars or changing car-track combos, which still wouldn't be an issue.

Thirdly, adding in modded physics doesn't break the integrity of the game. I'd like to see you apply that argument to everyone's favorite, Richard Burns Rally.

 

What exactly kind of mods do you "respectful" modders plan to add in? Liveries? Ooh, exciting!

On 1/15/2020 at 11:29 AM, SRD_SimVansevenant said:

I don't break the terms of service by modding the liveries because that is accepted by the developers. Modding physics and putting in ACAT is against the terms of service and should be punished. And I do blame the right people. The DLC cars are locked because of the danger of being made available for free by those modders that break the terms of service like the person above. 

FYI, people complain about the physics because they don't know how the car should behave in real life, how it should be driven to behave that way or they don't know how to create setups to make them behave in a way they want them to behave based on their driving style. The baseline ingame is a descent platform to start from and further refine to your personal style. 

TOS doesn't mean anything. I didn't pay (Well actually I got this one for free) for a product so that I can strictly only use it how someone else dictates I do. Especially in a game that I play solo. There's more than likely already systems in place to check for physics changes online. If I want to take a WRX car up Pikes Peak, what exactly is the harm in that? DLC being locked is not about modders, it's about pirates. Modders change values or add things, pirates steal stuff.

And no, the tarmac physics are in fact ****. Every one of us Beta testers (and the community as a whole) agrees with that.

On 1/16/2020 at 2:24 AM, SRD_SimVansevenant said:

Let's look at it from this perspective:

• Designing liveries doesn't give anyone any advantage over someone else. It's purely cosmetic. = Allowed
• ACAT and physics alterations by community members have the possibility to provide a significant and unfair advantage to certain players. = Not allowed
• They deny access to DLC cars for livery designs because those files also contain all the other elements of the car as well which can lead to piracy and the devs losing revenue. = Not allowed

ACAT doesn't give anyone advantages. You're not doing it online and it's a car and track combo that's not available, so where exactly is the advantage there? And once again, they can give access to the texture files without giving access to the car files, a la War Thunder with plane skins for example, which is solely online. That issue is straight from someone at CM.

On 1/16/2020 at 2:24 AM, SRD_SimVansevenant said:

It's modders that change core elements of gameplay or aspects that endanger revenue that are the reason certain things are no longer put available to the designers who don't mean any harm to the game, especially when their mods are only cosmetic.

Sometimes I'm baffled by the things I see other people saying. Like, Oh no, there's some mods for GTAV car physics, Rockstar loses $1 billion dollars. Uh oh, someone made me be able to play The Witcher 3 like Deadpool, Link, or Big Boss. I should get a refund.

Except, oh yeah, mods actually make games far more successful and seriously prolong the life of the product.

On 1/17/2020 at 12:44 AM, ianism said:

lol that's the worst analogy I've seen in my life. more guns lead to more death. it's a very simple relationship. look at the homicide data for the US versus any other rich country.

Factually false, and any location that's heavily anti-gun like Chicago, L.A., New York, London, etc. all have significantly higher crime statistics than places literally flooded with them. Those numbers are also often cherry picked or are based on total population, which to make that fair would be more like comparing the US to the entirety of Europe. Alternatively those figures are looking solely at gun related crimes, and once again, remove the gun free zones I mentioned earlier and the US is statistically actually far safer than a lot of other "rich" countries. Not to mention the fact that the FBI accurately reports all crime data while England actually expressly states that it very often reduces the severity of crimes (Like turning armed robbery into just petty theft) to make it seem safer than it is.

But this is not the place for politics, though I agree it was a terrible analogy.

4 hours ago, ianism said:

sorry, but no. I'm gonna get all pretentious about this for a sec: I have a master's degree in history. I have researched this. I will say this slowly.

you. clearly. do not. know. what. you. are. talking. about.

check out this list for a preliminary example, and sort by Rate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

the US is 89th with a rate of just under 6 per 100,000 people. it is the only rich country in the top 150, and the rate is triple that of the next-highest, which is Canada at 1.8.

Your source is Wikipedia? Wow.

Also in that source;

"Research suggests that intentional homicide demographics are affected by changes in trauma care, leading to changed lethality of violent assaults, so the intentional homicide rate may not necessarily indicate the overall level of societal violence.^[3] They may also be under-reported for political reasons."

But again, let's stop this pointless debate of defenseless European against Freedom Loving Americans.

Quote

sure, not all homicides are with guns, but again, this is just an example.

Well then by definition your conclusion is flawed.

Edited January 18 by JZStudios

[Ialyrn 264]

6 minutes ago, JZStudios said:

Especially in a game that I play solo

The game might be solo in the sense its player vs AI, baring the online racing modes anyway. But every single mode in this game has an online leaderboard attached to it. Thats where the issue will come into play.

Edited January 18 by Ialyrn

[JZStudios 631]

Just now, Ialyrn said:

The game might be solo in the since its player vs AI, baring the online racing modes anyway. But every single mode in this game has an online leaderboard attached to it. Thats where the issue will come into play.

Whatever. That really only affects Dgeesio and esports. and no one likes them anyways.

[somethingthing 282]

As long as it wont make it easier for users to cheat on the community events and clubs i couldnt care less if someone want their mini to drive like a awd group b. But at the same time the users that decide to use it need to know that they might get a ban. i dont think so but hey! who knows...

Edited January 18 by somethingthing

[KolysioN 39]

46 minutes ago, somethingthing said:

As long as it wont make it easier for users to cheat on the community events and clubs i couldnt care less if someone want their mini to drive like a awd group b. But at the same time the users that decide to use it need to know that they might get a ban. i dont think so but hey! who knows...

the use of the mod is the responsability of the user, a gun is free for anyone (in USA for example, with requirments of course), but the use is restricted...the problem is not the mod, but the user.
the ACAT, AWAT and physics mod are designed for offline experience, it will not be my fault if someone uses it for cheating online.

 

edit : if I'm banned or it's locked, stay tuned on youtube, all is incoming 🙂

Edited January 18 by KolysioN

[somethingthing 282]

5 minutes ago, KolysioN said:

the use of the mod is the responsability of the user, a gun is free for anyone, the use is restricted...the problem is not the mod, but the user.
the ACAT, AWAT and physics mod are designed for offline experience, it will not my fault if someone uses it for cheating online.

 

edit : if I'm banned or it's locked, stay tuned on youtube, all is incoming 🙂

And if ppl decide to use it online i hope codemasters already have something in place or will be very quick to fix something to ban those using it to cheat against others. No warnings given, just a permanent ban from connecting to racenet.

Edited January 18 by somethingthing

[KolysioN 39]

3 minutes ago, somethingthing said:

And if ppl decide to use it online i hope codemasters already have something in place or will be very quick to fix something to ban those using it to cheat against others. No warnings given, just a permanent ban from connecting to racenet.

since Dirt 2 the ACAT mod was released, and no one was banned :), and you can see the world records on Dirt Rally, it's funny, I add I have one which is 100% legit, I swear 😉

Edited January 18 by KolysioN

[somethingthing 282]

Just now, KolysioN said:

since Dirt 2 the ACAT mod was released, and no one was banned 🙂

Hope they get it sorted then. And im not sure why you making a happy smiley. You like to use the "its not the gun that kill its the user", would you make a happy smiley if someone shoot someone else aswell? A ****** comparision but so are yours.

[KolysioN 39]

Just now, somethingthing said:

Hope they get it sorted then. And im not sure why you making a happy smiley. You like to use the "its not the gun that kill its the user", would you make a happy smiley if someone shoot someone else aswell? A ****** comparision but so are yours.

I use the 🙂 smiley cause I'm always happy....even if I talk about serious things, sorry it's my nature 😉

[PJTierney 4,909]

@KolysioN

I would advise you to not release any physics mods to the public, and as mentioned in your previous thread, Codemasters does not support or endorse the AWAT or ACAT mod for DiRT Rally 2.0.

 

The End User License Agreement you agreed to when installing the game states:

Quote

CODEMASTERS MAY REVOKE YOUR LICENSE TO ACCESS EGONET, RACENET, AND/OR THE GAME IF YOU VIOLATE OR ASSIST OTHERS IN VIOLATING, THE LICENSE LIMITATIONS SET FORTH BELOW. YOU AGREE TO ONLY USE EGONET, RACENET AND/OR THE GAME, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS LICENSE AND YOU SHALL NOT:

• Create, use, offer, advertise, make available and/or distribute any so called “cheats” that influence and/or facilitate gameplay, including exploits of any in-game bugs, and thereby grant you and/or any other user an advantage over other players not using such methods
• Create, use, offer, advertise, make available and/or distribute any so called “hack” that accesses or modifies the software of RaceNet, EGONet, and/or the Game in a manner not expressly authorised by Codemasters.
• Create, use, offer, advertise, make available and/or distribute any code or software not expressly authorized by Codemasters, that can be used in connection with RaceNet, EGONet, the Game, and/or any component or feature thereof which changes and/or facilitates the gameplay.