ultimate rally game

Here's some features I'd like to see in a rally game:

- very realistic/complex physics (and the option to add driving aids, such
as traction control, etc.- a slider/numerical option similar to Gran Turismo
would be great for this).
- random stage generation (similar to V-Rally)
- ability to make custom stages (similar to V-Rally)
- stages could be customized for length, road width, conditions, and overall
difficulty (competition's speed), anywhere from 3-4 minutes to 25-30 minutes
- career mode that would use random stages and custom stage lengths based on
user choice
- large selection of cars, including vintage cars. If the devs can't get a
license for the real cars- make the up!
- NO cars are locked, except perhaps for a progression in the career mode.
- online and arcade style rallycross racing
- traditional pace notes (not like Colin McRae Rally).

>"Magnulus" > wrote
> - very realistic/complex physics (and the option to add driving aids,
> such
> as traction control, etc.- a slider/numerical option similar to Gran
> Turismo
> would be great for this).


Why do you want on one side complexity, but on the other options to take off
that complexity? Doesn't make sense.


> - random stage generation (similar to V-Rally)
> - ability to make custom stages (similar to V-Rally)


Impossible nowadays considering the complexity of track geography.







--
-- François Ménard <ymenard>
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...

Yeah I agree with you YM, it is Oxy Moronic...
All natural artificial flavor hahahaa

it is like saying Super Size my Quarter pounder meal, oh and the diet coke.



ymenard enlightened us with:
>> "Magnulus" > wrote
>> - very realistic/complex physics (and the option to add driving
>> aids, such
>> as traction control, etc.- a slider/numerical option similar to Gran
>> Turismo
>> would be great for this).
>
>
> Why do you want on one side complexity, but on the other options to
> take off that complexity? Doesn't make sense.
>
>
>> - random stage generation (similar to V-Rally)
>> - ability to make custom stages (similar to V-Rally)
>
>
> Impossible nowadays considering the complexity of track geography.

>"Ken MacKay" > wrote
> Maybe he wants it to be a commercial success?



A commercial success for a racing simulation won't ever happen anymore on
the PC. There was Nascar Racing 1, and that's all. All others are success
within the own field of simracing, not of all PC gaming itself. Even less
console gaming!





--
-- François Ménard <ymenard>
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...

Plowboy2 wrote:
> it is like saying Super Size my Quarter pounder meal,
> oh and the diet coke

I do that. I'm not on a diet, but I don't see the point in drinking a
caloric beverage (i.e. syrup) when the non-caloric version taste just
as good. That like saying, "Don't make my Quarter Pounder Meal any
larger or taste any different, just quadruple the calories, please. I
just like empty calories. Thanks."

Adding a non-diet coke to a Quarter Pounder Meal doesn't quadruple the
calories. Infact, it doesn't even double them.. and that's with the KING
size Coke.

Mike
http://mikebeauchamp.com

"ymenard" > wrote here on 11 Jan 2005:

> A commercial success for a racing simulation won't ever happen
> anymore on the PC. There was Nascar Racing 1, and that's all.
<snip>

Admittedly also a long time ago, but doesn't GP2 count as a commercial
success?

--
Please remove ".invalid" to reply by email.

Support the world's oldest motorsport venue!
http://www.shelsley-walsh.co.uk/future.html

Mike Beauchamp wrote:
> Adding a non-diet coke to a Quarter Pounder Meal doesn't quadruple
the
> calories.

I didn't say it did. It was an analogy to the Coke.

To me, Diet Coke taste as good as regular Coke. So why would I ever
choose the one that has 80 grams of sugar? Just because I'm not on a
diet?

I don't care if I'm ordering a triple fudge sunday, if I order a Coke
with it it'll be a Diet Coke. Not because I'm trying to lose weight,
but because there's no point in consuming empty calories I can't even
taste.

Coo'

"Eric Tetz" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Mike Beauchamp wrote:
>> Adding a non-diet coke to a Quarter Pounder Meal doesn't quadruple
> the
>> calories.
>
> I didn't say it did. It was an analogy to the Coke.
>
> To me, Diet Coke taste as good as regular Coke. So why would I ever
> choose the one that has 80 grams of sugar? Just because I'm not on a
> diet?
>
> I don't care if I'm ordering a triple fudge sunday, if I order a Coke
> with it it'll be a Diet Coke. Not because I'm trying to lose weight,
> but because there's no point in consuming empty calories I can't even
> taste.
>

OK, since you wanted to nit pick the analogy, did you get the original
point? Somebody wanted the most comprehensive simulator out there, with
complex this and that, then in the same frikkin breath, wants to "drive" it
with a joypad or keyboard, it is Oxy Moronic..

Got it, get er done

Eric Tetz enlightened us with:
> Mike Beauchamp wrote:
>> Adding a non-diet coke to a Quarter Pounder Meal doesn't quadruple
>> the calories.
>
> I didn't say it did. It was an analogy to the Coke.
>
> To me, Diet Coke taste as good as regular Coke. So why would I ever
> choose the one that has 80 grams of sugar? Just because I'm not on a
> diet?
>
> I don't care if I'm ordering a triple fudge sunday, if I order a Coke
> with it it'll be a Diet Coke. Not because I'm trying to lose weight,
> but because there's no point in consuming empty calories I can't even
> taste.