Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  

"Fun" cars in Dirt Rally series - yes or no?

Recommended Posts

Many racing games often feature hidden, secret or otherwise unconventional vehicles, usually only available under specific circumstances such as challenges, unlocks or cheat codes. They are not meant to be taken seriously - only to have a bit of fun at how ridiculous it is to drive them.

Should Dirt Rally games (specifically Dirt Rally 3) features a couple of such cars? They can be pickup trucks, transit vans, a three-wheel car, taxi, limousine etc., whatever makes the game different. They don't have to be perfectly tuned or modeled, as they aren't meant to be used competitively. They aren't supposed to be the main part of the game, nor take anything away from the core features.

Perhaps the biggest reason to include them is viral marketing. It makes for a perfect clickbaity title, such as "can I beat X in Y vehicle??". A transit van bumping in Argentina is something to gawk at and, as such, gets more eyes on the game.

  • Disagree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, PJTierney said:

Image result for rally transit van

Exactly. The model for the car will be in DR3 anyway - although it's probable that the player model will need to be vastly upgraded from a generic background model.

This is off-topic, but I remember Colin McRae Rally 2.0's multiplayer having some sort of almost "Mario kart" mode with fireballs? This would obviously require even more work, but would be somewhat hilarious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't mind silly cars, but I want them separate from the main game (AKA : no leaderboards)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, RookieOne said:

I don't mind silly cars, but I want them separate from the main game (AKA : no leaderboards)

tbh if someone beats your record in a Ford Transit you gotta take the L

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heck, no thanks.

1) I don't consider it 'fun' at all

2) I'd rather the resources (especially if licencing costs are involved) go into a real car, which I will find much more enjoyable personally

  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Yaggings said:

tbh if someone beats your record in a Ford Transit you gotta take the L

Sabine Schmitz would like to have a word with you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A 2CV would be really nice! Something like this beauty maybe:

iu.jpeg.b60b543acd2be6d5d86100c78a5bf26f.jpeg

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, RodgerDavies said:

2) I'd rather the resources (especially if licencing costs are involved) go into a real car, which I will find much more enjoyable personally

This. It would certainly be fun to have a random car or two to play with, but I am only likely to use a fun car once or twice for a laugh, whereas a "proper" car I'm likely to keep going back to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the first game I ever played was NFS II SE. in that you could enter cheat codes to drive as any object in the game - road signs, the massive T-rex that was on one level...

[top screenshot is from PS1, bottom is PC)

Image result for nfs II se codes

Image result for nfs II se codes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm absolutely against it.
 

I expect a serious simulation from this series.
There are so few racing games out there with a serious design, even Forza Horizon and The Crew got absolutely ridiculous with jumps, useless "attention" cars etc. in later entries.

Aside from that, I just don't get what's funny about driving a van around a rally track.
I would say it's the typical childish humor, always chasing the next laugh. But it's absolutely a waste of money, time and resources just for a laugh.

I know things like that happened in the old N64/PSX-days alot, but back then developing a game wasn't as huge an investment like today.
That's the reason why eastereggs and secrets are rare these days, because developement is very expensive now and the developers want to make sure you know about everything what's in the game as early as possible to make the most out of it.

So I would be really disappointed if they waste resources for that, at least in DR3.
If the next game is DiRT 5, with Landrush, Gymkhana and all that BS I am not interested in anyway, there would fit a "fun" car like that.
I wouldn't buy it anyway, so I don't care.

 

Sorry for the rant, but in the last few years I see a big gap in interest between me (age 33) and the younger generation of kids/teenagers destroying more and more of my beloved videogame franchises.
There's not much left for me aside from some Indies, Nintendo-Franchises and AA-racing games.

  • Haha 1
  • Agree 1

Share this post


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

Aside from that, I just don't get what's funny about driving a van around a rally track.
I would say it's the typical childish humor, always chasing the next laugh. But it's absolutely a waste of money, time and resources just for a laugh.

What's fun about driving an obviously overpowered Rally GT car? What about a dangerous Group B car? It's the challenge, it's how different these cars are to the rest of the pack. Nobody plays racing games with only the most optimal car. If you do, then you are in the tiniest of minorities.

9 hours ago, UnderclassGDfan said:

I know things like that happened in the old N64/PSX-days alot [...] the younger generation of kids/teenagers destroying more and more of my beloved videogame franchises.

Lol.

Providing players with actual unlocks, rather than two season passes is going against the mainstream. I cannot discern any additional arguments from your post, because they seem to be a random rant about the state of gaming. Games for children are not for you - they are for children. There's nothing about Dirt Rally that makes it particularly "serious" - it's not Planescape: Torment. One or two cars that you aren't interested in won't ruin this game, when it repeatedly features an entire gamemode with dozens of separate cars that not a lot of people care about.

Share this post


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

What's fun about driving an obviously overpowered Rally GT car? What about a dangerous Group B car? It's the challenge, it's how different these cars are to the rest of the pack. Nobody plays racing games with only the most optimal car. If you do, then you are in the tiniest of minorities.

What!?
You basically describing what is already the essence of the game.
There is no reason to put silly cars in the game, that don't belong in a rally environment.

If you want to race in a truck, why don't you play Forza Horizon 4?
In a racing game with around 60 cars without counting DLC, there shouldn't be wasted space for silly cars.
 

2 hours ago, Yaggings said:

Providing players with actual unlocks, rather than two season passes is going against the mainstream.

Again...what!?
There is a unlock mechanism in My Team, like in most racing games.
Nothing wrong with mainstream mechanisms like buying cars with ingame credits or buying additional content, nothing new.
This is just a hidden dislike against paid DLC.

2 hours ago, Yaggings said:

I cannot discern any additional arguments from your post, because they seem to be a random rant about the state of gaming. Games for children are not for you - they are for children.

The second part wasn't meant to be an "argument", just a rant about silly kids with silly expectations, because of silly humor.
The result is garbage like Fortnite, wich spreads like a virus to other games.
Best example is Forza Horizon 4 with that Eliminator-Mode, followed by bright colors, silly emotes and useless cars.

And games for children are for children?
Who is talking about games for children?
I was talking about game franchises perfectly fitted for me like Forza Horizon 1&2 turned into BS with 3&4.
And this is by far not the only franchise.

2 hours ago, Yaggings said:

There's nothing about Dirt Rally that makes it particularly "serious" - it's not Planescape: Torment.

I just don't get the reference. I don't even know what Planescape is.

And if you don't get what DiRT Rally makes it a serious game, you probably never heard of the word "simulation".
You know, it is simulating the rally sport.

3 hours ago, Yaggings said:

One or two cars that you aren't interested in won't ruin this game, when it repeatedly features an entire gamemode with dozens of separate cars that not a lot of people care about.

It will. It always starts this way.
The second part I don't get what you mean. Do you wanna say "I play the game, but I am not interested in most rally cars in the game"?
Or is it a reference to RX? I mean, it's the official RX game, sooo...
I personally don't care much about RX, but I get the point in having it in the game.
The reason is probably having a bonus against the official WRC game.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, UnderclassGDfan said:

What!?
You basically describing what is already the essence of the game.
There is no reason to put silly cars in the game, that don't belong in a rally environment.

If you want to race in a truck, why don't you play Forza Horizon 4?
In a racing game with around 60 cars without counting DLC, there shouldn't be wasted space for silly cars.

You don't get to decide which cars are "silly", and which belong and which don't. I'll give you a reason - some people would like to try them out and it's good marketing. "I don't like it" isn't really a strong argument.

9 minutes ago, UnderclassGDfan said:

Again...what!?
There is a unlock mechanism in My Team, like in most racing games.
Nothing wrong with mainstream mechanisms like buying cars with ingame credits or buying additional content, nothing new.
This is just a hidden dislike against paid DLC.

I don't know why I'd have to explain your own post to you, but you've ragged pretty heavily on "destroying videogame franchises". You have to decide whether you're for the mainstream or against it, can't have it both ways.

15 minutes ago, UnderclassGDfan said:

The second part wasn't meant to be an "argument", just a rant about silly kids with silly expectations, because of silly humor.
The result is garbage like Fortnite, wich spreads like a virus to other games.
Best example is Forza Horizon 4 with that Eliminator-Mode, followed by bright colors, silly emotes and useless cars.

And games for children are for children?
Who is talking about games for children?
I was talking about game franchises perfectly fitted for me like Forza Horizon 1&2 turned into BS with 3&4.
And this is by far not the only franchise.

It's almost like most consumers aren't stuck-up and so unsure of their adulthood that they have to reconfirm it through the media they are consuming, but simply want a bit of fun.

Also, what is the connection between introducing an extraordinary car to the game and Fortnite? A Slippery Slope fallacy?

17 minutes ago, UnderclassGDfan said:

I just don't get the reference. I don't even know what Planescape is.

And if you don't get what DiRT Rally makes it a serious game, you probably never heard of the word "simulation".
You know, it is simulating the rally sport.

You purport to being an old-timer, yet apparently have minimal knowledge on the games from the 90s. This might be just a quip, but it casts doubt on whether you're actually more informed than all of the "kids these days".

"Simulation" simply means that the game will generally forgo design in favor of the most realistic depiction of the subject. If you're accurately simulating a Ford Transit in Argentina, that's still a simulation.

21 minutes ago, UnderclassGDfan said:

It will. It always starts this way.

Slippery Slope again. Seriously, Google it.

22 minutes ago, UnderclassGDfan said:

The second part I don't get what you mean. Do you wanna say "I play the game, but I am not interested in most rally cars in the game"?
Or is it a reference to RX? I mean, it's the official RX game, sooo...
I personally don't care much about RX, but I get the point in having it in the game.
The reason is probably having a bonus against the official WRC game.

So it appears you do understand why a game would have different parts that appeal to different consumers, while not infringing at all on the experience of other consumers.

Honestly, I should make your argument for you, because you're doing it extremely poorly. What you're concerned about is identification - that Dirt Rally has a specific brand perception that needs to be upheld and corroding that identity would either dilute the game's style or erode the importance of the main modes.
This is not a bad argument to make in many games, but it doesn't apply here. 1-3 interesting unlocks aren't going to cause anything of the sorts. There's already a precedent in other "serious simulators" and other games from this series, which had a very similar identification. Additionally, the selling point of Dirt Rally should be difficulty - a difficult car to drive fits perfectly into that, just like the Rally GT class.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Yaggings said:

You don't get to decide which cars are "silly", and which belong and which don't. I'll give you a reason - some people would like to try them out and it's good marketing. "I don't like it" isn't really a strong argument.

I decide wich cars are silly. For myself.
A Ford Transit on a rally track is silly...for me!

I never said, I decide wich belong and wich don't, I just didn't wrote "for me" behind everything because I thought it's obvious that all what I write is my opinion only. So sorry.

Again, in Forza Horizon 4 are trucks and vans like the Ford Transit and offroad tracks, the ideal place for things like that. Unfortunately.
Why wasting space for iconic rally cars for that in DR?
If the game had several hundreds of cars, yes, ok, but it's not that much.

I would even replace the Mustang, Camaro and DS 21 if I could.

"I don't like it" is not an argument, it's an opinion, deal with it.

8 hours ago, Yaggings said:

I don't know why I'd have to explain your own post to you, but you've ragged pretty heavily on "destroying videogame franchises". You have to decide whether you're for the mainstream or against it, can't have it both ways.

Of course I can.
Mainstream is not only black and white.
There are good and bad things.
Mainstream is nothing bad for itself, but it can get bad if you pick the BS out of it.

8 hours ago, Yaggings said:

It's almost like most consumers aren't stuck-up and so unsure of their adulthood that they have to reconfirm it through the media they are consuming, but simply want a bit of fun.

So you now get personal...wow.
I am absolutely aware of that I am 33.
Only because I don't think it's fun driving big, heavy trucks on narrow gravel roads with lots of bumps and jumps, doesn't mean I am unsure of my age...unbelievable arrogant.

9 hours ago, Yaggings said:

Also, what is the connection between introducing an extraordinary car to the game and Fortnite? A Slippery Slope fallacy?

Fortnite is just the epicenter of silliness at the moment. Forza Horizon 4 in the racing genre.
Bringing "extraordinary" cars to the game and put marketing around that would mean more people come to the game expecting things like that, what results in even more of those cars over time.
I don't want that. I want DR as a hardcore rally simulation like it is now and focussing on that.

9 hours ago, Yaggings said:

You purport to being an old-timer, yet apparently have minimal knowledge on the games from the 90s. This might be just a quip, but it casts doubt on whether you're actually more informed than all of the "kids these days".

You really expect me to know all of the games from the 90s? This questions you my knowledge of gaming?
Do you know the game "World Driver Championship" without googling it?
I was and always been a console gamer, probably a PC game?

Did I said, I am an old-timer? No.
I am just not happy how the games industry moves to silly cosmetic stuff and the gag of the day kind of thing.
Down to earth, realistic simulation of real world sport doesn't seem fun enough these days.

9 hours ago, Yaggings said:

"Simulation" simply means that the game will generally forgo design in favor of the most realistic depiction of the subject. If you're accurately simulating a Ford Transit in Argentina, that's still a simulation.

Touché!

9 hours ago, Yaggings said:

Slippery Slope again. Seriously, Google it.

Doesn't make sense if I do.
You are just offensive for whatever reason.
Are you mad because I don't have your opinion?

9 hours ago, Yaggings said:

So it appears you do understand why a game would have different parts that appeal to different consumers, while not infringing at all on the experience of other consumers.

There's a difference between a proper simulation of RX I am not interested in and silly cars that don't belong in a hardcore rally simulation.

9 hours ago, Yaggings said:

Honestly, I should make your argument for you, because you're doing it extremely poorly. What you're concerned about is identification - that Dirt Rally has a specific brand perception that needs to be upheld and corroding that identity would either dilute the game's style or erode the importance of the main modes.

Extremely arrogant.
I bring up that argument. Just not that clearly, because I am poor in making my point. Especially not in my own mother tongue.

9 hours ago, Yaggings said:

This is not a bad argument to make in many games, but it doesn't apply here.

So you now congratulate to yourself for your own argument made for me. Wow.

9 hours ago, Yaggings said:

1-3 interesting unlocks aren't going to cause anything of the sorts. There's already a precedent in other "serious simulators" and other games from this series, which had a very similar identification. Additionally, the selling point of Dirt Rally should be difficulty - a difficult car to drive fits perfectly into that, just like the Rally GT class.

Examples please.
Not counting the AAA-massive simlators like Forza Motorsport, Gran Turismo and Project CARS wich have multiple hundreds of cars.
Again, it is mainly because of the wasted resources that would be better spend for "serious" iconic rally cars.
We don't even have (WRC) rally cars from 2011 onwards because of licensing, so it would be better to put at least as most iconic rally cars from the past in the game as possible.
RX is a good bonus to compete against the official rally game. Hill climb would be better, but licensing again.

Why you want cars like this in DR, wich has the focus on hardcore rally simulation?
It would fit more in the main series of DiRT with a slightly more casual handling.
And even in DiRT 5 I wouldn't drive them.
I remember Colin McRae: DiRT on X-Box 360 had rally raid trucks. Was really boring to drive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll try to be brief to not make this post ridiculously long.

2 hours ago, UnderclassGDfan said:

"I don't like it" is not an argument, it's an opinion, deal with it. 

That's fine. Then don't present it as an argument.

2 hours ago, UnderclassGDfan said:

So you now get personal...wow.
I am absolutely aware of that I am 33.
Only because I don't think it's fun driving big, heavy trucks on narrow gravel roads with lots of bumps and jumps, doesn't mean I am unsure of my age...unbelievable arrogant.

No, it's because you're extremely sensitive about "seriousness" and "kid games" and talking about it in an extremely black-or-white fashion. The aforementioned Colin McRae Rally 3 isn't, by any measure, a "kid game", yet it features a fun secret unlock.

2 hours ago, UnderclassGDfan said:

Bringing "extraordinary" cars to the game and put marketing around that would mean more people come to the game expecting things like that, what results in even more of those cars over time.
I don't want that. I want DR as a hardcore rally simulation like it is now and focussing on that.

Yes, that is a slippery slope fallacy. Nobody's going to buy this game solely because there's a Ford Transit in it, but they might be exposed to the game through it.

2 hours ago, UnderclassGDfan said:

I am just not happy how the games industry moves to silly cosmetic stuff and the gag of the day kind of thing.
Down to earth, realistic simulation of real world sport doesn't seem fun enough these days.

One, something being fun and not entirely serious isn't the same as any of these things.
Two, I really doubt you have actually played Fortnite. Kids don't play Fortnite because it has "cosmetics" and "is funny". They also play Minecraft, which has literally none of these things. The unifying element of every game that's popular with kids right now - Fortnite, Minecraft, Roblox, GTA Online - is creativity. They have dozens of modes which provide all types of experiences.

2 hours ago, UnderclassGDfan said:

There's a difference between a proper simulation of RX I am not interested in and silly cars that don't belong in a hardcore rally simulation.

There really isn't. It's just your opinion, you've already admitted it.

2 hours ago, UnderclassGDfan said:

Examples please.

Literally the first response in this thread.

2 hours ago, UnderclassGDfan said:

Why you want cars like this in DR, wich has the focus on hardcore rally simulation?

Let me reiterate then:

  • They are another challenging vehicle, just like Rally GT cars.
  • They are amusing and fun.
  • They are good marketing.

This actually reminds me of a time when Witcher 1 came out. I have suggested that the sequel could feature a multiplayer - a serious and bloody one. I was similarly berated that it's "not in the spirit of the franchise" and multiplayer doesn't fit in a "serious and dark" game. Well, since that time, the game's developers have released four multiplayer games set in the universe, including a freaking MOBA. They were an absolute butchery of the setting and most of them failed, but it hasn't changed anything about the main series.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Yaggings said:

That's fine. Then don't present it as an argument.

I never did, don't accuse me to it.
This is just your assumption.

20 minutes ago, Yaggings said:

No, it's because you're extremely sensitive about "seriousness" and "kid games" and talking about it in an extremely black-or-white fashion. The aforementioned Colin McRae Rally 3 isn't, by any measure, a "kid game", yet it features a fun secret unlock.

What no? You did got personal, because you are really arrogant or at least writing like you are.

I am very sensitive about that, because I already saw what happens to my beloved franchises.
It get's worse and worse and I find it more and more difficult to find games that suits my taste.

CMR3 is almost 20 years old, a time were you could more easily put stuff like that into the game.
And CMR3/04/2005 is part of the main series, the successor to it being Colin McRae: DiRT up until DiRT 4.
DiRT Rally & 2.0 being splitted from main series as hardcore rally simulation.
At least this is the way I see them.

So what's wrong having "extraordinary" cars and things like Landrush, Gymkhana etc. in DiRT 5 and leaving DR3 serious like it is now?
If Codemasters follows the pattern, the next entry would be DiRT 5 anyway.

32 minutes ago, Yaggings said:

Yes, that is a slippery slope fallacy. Nobody's going to buy this game solely because there's a Ford Transit in it, but they might be exposed to the game through it.

Yeah, probably, for the moment.
I just see what happens after that.
Or at least it's my fear it turns into a new Colin McRae: DiRT 2, or worse: DiRT: Showdown.

It wont happen with DR2.0 anymore anyway, because the big support ends with the Flat Out Pack.
In DiRT 5 I would be ok with that, but not in DR3.

I still don't get what "slippery slope fallacy" means.
Google translation isn't very helpful.

38 minutes ago, Yaggings said:

Two, I really doubt you have actually played Fortnite. Kids don't play Fortnite because it has "cosmetics" and "is funny". They also play Minecraft, which has literally none of these things. The unifying element of every game that's popular with kids right now - Fortnite, Minecraft, Roblox, GTA Online - is creativity. They have dozens of modes which provide all types of experiences.

You're right, I didn't played it.
But I know enough about it to dislike it heavily. It's pretty much impossible for a gamer these days to avoid it.
YouTube, Twitch, advertisments etc are full of it.
And I have a younger brother who plays alot of these games.

I generally don't like MP-focused shooters.
And this game is build around a cosmetics shop and a battle pass, wich forces you to play alot, if you want all that limited stuff.
I know that relatively new marketing strategy too well, I play quite alot Destiny 2.

That creativity argument is nonsense in my point of view.
Most games have some sort of creativity in them.
Fortnite is mainly a PvP-Shooter with a specific tweak.

1 hour ago, Yaggings said:

There really isn't. It's just your opinion, you've already admitted it.

Lie.
I admitted the definition of the word "simulation".
RX has a connection to the rally sport.
What connection have trucks like the Ford Transit to rally?

1 hour ago, Yaggings said:

Literally the first response in this thread.

Already explained. Old game.
You can keep ignoring that argument, but it's still valid in my point of view.

1 hour ago, Yaggings said:

Let me reiterate then:

  • They are another challenging vehicle, just like Rally GT cars.
  • They are amusing and fun.
  • They are good marketing.

1) Literally every car can be challenging, why must it be an "over the top" car like a truck? It should have at least a historic connection to rally.
2) Subjective.
3) Good marketing for what? "Hey, this is the ultimate rally experience with a ultra realistic handling physics model and realistic tracks, iconic rally cars...and hey, we have trucks!" This just gets those people to the game who would ruin it for me in the long run. Again. Already happened.

1 hour ago, Yaggings said:

This actually reminds me of a time when Witcher 1 came out. I have suggested that the sequel could feature a multiplayer - a serious and bloody one. I was similarly berated that it's "not in the spirit of the franchise" and multiplayer doesn't fit in a "serious and dark" game. Well, since that time, the game's developers have released four multiplayer games set in the universe, including a freaking MOBA. They were an absolute butchery of the setting and most of them failed, but it hasn't changed anything about the main series.

I don't like MOBAs, too. Generally most PvP games. Look at the market right now. How many PvP games are out there at the moment and how many games without any connection to PvP? The gaming industry changed hard in the last 10 years towards to PvP, "game live services", cosmetics-shops and battle passes, the worst thing, wich you have to buy AND you have to get the content within a specific time frame.

And with abo-service models like game pass it will get much worse in the future.
It even effected DR2.0 with that free BMW M2 Competition and the liveries.

But yeah, hard off-topic now, I will come to an end with my last statement.

The Witcher as an example: It didn't changed the The Witcher main series, because they put the MP-stuff in a separate game.
I know, a complete MP-Part has probably bigger impact on the main game then 2-3 silly cars on DiRT, but it's still making my point that stuff like this shouldn't effect that simulation.
The Witcher is a solo experience, and an MP-Part would negatively affect the solo experience: Best example is BioShock 2.
Because resources are limited.
Same goes for DR3, but in a smaller scale of course.


 

  • Agree 1

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
Sign in to follow this  

×