GTRevival Is Now Project Motor Racing, Straight4 Secures Publishing Deal With GIANTS Software


GTRevival is no more - the Straight4 Studios title will now officially be called Project Motor Racing. And the studio partners with an exciting new publisher for the title.

The first project of Straight4 Studios has a new name. After being initially announced as GTR Revival, which was later shortened to GTRevival, the title currently in development by many former SimBin team members from the days of GTR and GTR2 now has a new name - it is going to be called Project Motor Racing.

Not only does this likely reflect a change in direction for the game content-wise, it also connects to the Project CARS franchise, which several team members around Studio Head Ian Bell also created. However, this is not the only bit of news that @Michel Wolk and I learned when following an invitation to Silverstone by Straight4.

Project-Motor-Racing-Straight4-Giants-Michel-Porsche-956.jpg

Can you tell that Michel enjoyed our Silverstone trip?

When we arrived at the track, we did not know what to expect. There was a track day for some of the most exclusive and wildest cars on the planet, the "Secret Meet", where even personalities like Adrian Newey or Zak Brown were present. The former even took to the track himself, driving a Ford GT40, an Aston Martin Valkyrie and a Leyton-House CG901, the F1 car he had designed himself for the 1990 season.

In one of the pit garages, there was an old friend from the GTR and Gran Turismo days waiting for us, the Lister Storm. Next to it were banners with the Straight4 Studios logo and that of the new publisher: GIANTS Software. And they really are giants in the simulation genre, just not in sim racing so far.

Project-Motor-Racing-Straight4-Giants-Announcement.jpg

Image: Straight4 Studios / GIANTS Software

GIANTS Software Partners With Straight4​

The Swiss publisher became famous and successful with their Farming Simulator and will now go from a comparatively leisurely pace to top speeds on the virtual racing tracks. We had the chance to chat with GIANTS CEO Christian Ammann about the project, and he is excited about the new adventure.

"With all the capabilities in-house, a successful history of strategic brand alliances, and an infrastructure proven through multiple projects, this partnership of combined strengths marks another milestone by expanding our genre expertise", Ammann says about the new partnership. "We started to self-publish our titles in 2001. That worked really, really well. So we decided to also publish other titles. Of course, we were looking into simulation titles, and sim racing is a very interesting market. It's also games we like personally."

Similarly, Bell is looking forward to realizing the new alliance's potential: "Our partnership with GIANTS is the last piece of the puzzle for the development of Project Motor Racing. It’s fantastic news not only for our studio, but the sim racing genre as a whole. Those who are familiar with GIANTS’ best-selling franchise will recognise why this partnership is going to refresh the sim racing genre in ways that the community is going to love."

Project-Motor-Racing-Straight4-Giants-Ammann-Bell.jpg

GIANTS Software CEO Christian Ammann (left) and Straight4 Studio Head Ian Bell. Image: Straight4 / GIANTS

What To Expect From Project Motor Racing​

Of course, we also wanted to know more about the game's direction. The Lister Storm is a first indication of the content of Project Motor Racing, and while this rare and legendary V12 racing car was scanned live on site and confirmed as the first car in the game, we tried to get a little more out of Ian Bell about the content and features of the new simulation.

"It was GT Revival up until the point where in building the assets, we decided that we were getting a bit bored with only GT. And don't get me wrong, we had about 80-90 GT cars in there. Pretty much every GT car you could ever think of", Bell told us. "We're not listing the content as of yet, but we're way into the hundreds now, in terms of car count, we've just kept going and going. So we kept adding more and more and more, from interesting areas. And alternative series that we find interesting, that aren't called GT. But we will we will announce soon."

Project-Motor-Racing-Straight4-Giants-Lister-Storm-Scan.png

The Lister Storm that was scanned at Silverstone (chassis SA9STRM1B1B053122) is mostly known for its 2003 FIA GT campaign in the hands of Jamie Campbell-Walter and Nathan Kinch, who raced the car in the final four races of the season and took the win in Anderstorp, Sweden.

Bell also confirmed that PMR is indeed going to be a realistic simulator that will focus on both singleplayer and multiplayer. "It’s like picking between your two favorite children. I can't do it because I love a single player for the fact that it doesn't tie you into a system where if you're not social, if you are uncomfortable driving, you can still get on and have great fun in the game. So you need, in my opinion, a great single player career mode, which we're really pushing to hell and back.

"At the same time. We also believe we need an iRacing style standard or better multiplayer mode. So there's a reason why we're not shipping at the end of 2024, like we planned a couple of years ago, we've added so much. To try to do the best in every area is what we're aiming for."

Furthermore, VR is a core element that Straight4 has in mind in development of Project Motor Racing. Bell continues: "We couldn't possibly not have VR. It's crucial for us", the Studio Head said referencing the VR capabilities of the Project CARS titles.

All of this combined sounds rather promising. We cannot share any moving images, screenshots or more information about the technical basis yet, but we assume that this could happen in August, possibly at gamescom.

Stig-approved Handling​

As for Project Motorsports Racing's physics, we cannot say anything yet either, but we did have a pleasant and very interesting chat with Straight4's handling consultant - none other than the former Stig on Top Gear, Ben Collins, who drove the Lister at Silverstone to collect both footage and data.

The cars "look great. They sound great. But then how do they drive? How do they feel? What's the feedback through the steering wheel? All of that stuff we finesse", explained Collins. "And I've got the real world experience to, to bring it in so I can figure out, you know, what it should be handling like. And in the case of [the Lister], it's really quite unique, although it's front engine, rear wheel drive."

Project-Motor-Racing-Straight4-Giants-Ben-Collins.jpg


Its engine may technically be front-mounted, but "a long way back towards the middle of the car where the driver sits. So you get really, you know, really good handling, almost like a mid-engine car. So unless you've driven it, it's quite hard to be really sure. What would it handle like? And you might make something that handles evil because you think it looks badass, but actually it's quite tame. So I'll try and bring as much of that into the game as I can."

Interestingly, Collins - who recently started a sim racing YouTube channel himself - also pointed out a seemingly common problem that sims apparently get wrong frequently. "The biggest problem with sims is that nearly always the cars a too difficult to drive, and that there's a massive drop off in grip, either the front or the rear or both." How this translates to Project Motor Racing will be interesting to see.

What are your thoughts on Project Motor Racing as the new name, the publishing deal with GIANTS Software and the comments about the development of the sim? Let us know on Twitter @OverTake_gg or in the comments below!
About author
Yannik Haustein
Lifelong motorsport enthusiast and sim racing aficionado, walking racing history encyclopedia.

Sim racing editor, streamer and one half of the SimRacing Buddies podcast (warning, German!).

Heel & Toe Gang 4 life :D

Comments

Only part that’s bothersome/problematic is when developers tout hyper realistic simulation and their pro driver connections and then make blanket statements about sims in general.

This in a nutshell is why I participate in these discussions at all... It's just a game and if that's what they marketed them as, not as simulations or as the closest thing to reality, I'd have very little to say on the subject...

The marketing of racing games is beyond a joke with all these paid for racing driver quotes like those in this article...

They create a very false representation to the consumer who then goes and parrots the idea that "racing cars should be easy" and takes it steps further than the surface level the marketing does because there's no context involved...

Promoting titles via word of mouth where hooning in a race car or driving at 10/10s on cold tyres doesn't come with risks... That set ups don't matter at all in how a car is glued to the track, "it should always be glued to the track no matter what because they have super grippy tyres in real life"... Which outside of the qualy tyres of the 80s just isn't the case...

Which leads us to the diluted sims we have today where AC despite it's warts and age looks like it met the marketing brief in comparison to anything on the Madness engine right now...


Question is... Is there any interest in doing so by the tyre manufacturers? I don't think Pirelli would love to share its data publicly and let Michelin, Dunlop, Metzeler etc study them.

In the current economic climate, absolutely zero...

Which is a similar reason to why all these small companies make their games and leave many warts in them... If they worked together and pooled their talents to create an engine that ticked all the boxes for sim racing, there'd be much more for the end consumer to enjoy in these titles... But that's unlikely any time soon...
 
Last edited:
You keep falling into the trap of relating what Ben Collins remarked as absolutes. Absolute grip, absolute difficulty, absolute numbers.

Nowhere in that interview did he say that "devs should just dial up the grip knob". Even because that actually wouldn't make driving any sim any easier, Paradoxical for someone who sees only absolutes i imagine.

Again, the "problem" with sims is not how much grip they have. You dismiss Josef N opinion because he didnt grew up in sims.

THIS DOESNT MATTER!

If a real driver can't use any of his skill set in your "sim", you failed. It doesnt matter what numbers you put there then, if the experience has no relation with reality(even discounting the different sensorial inputs you need in sim vs real life) Then your "sim" is no more "realistic" than micromachines.


Besides, if you yourself admit that our current models can't "simulate reality", why are so concerned if someone dials up or down some knobs, based on hardly verifiable or accurate tire data? That seems a pretty unrelated bar to cover. Much more important would be to indeed make something where a guy like Ben Collins can sit and feel confortable with, regardless of he "grew up with sims" or not.

I grew up with fighting games, so is street fighter a "sim", and it doesnt matter if Bruce Lee would suck at it, because he didnt "grew up" with fighting games? Or is the "Problem" the fact that a fighting game actually has no translation of skill set to real fighting?

Are you implying that ALL the sims we have are so removed from reality to the point they are meaningless for someone who didnt learn a specific skillset for them, and that we cannot hope to have anything that translates in terms of skillset to real life until we have some quantic computers that can simulate reality at a molecular level or something? Strange if thats so, considering your line of work.


Anyway, sorry, but i don't agree. And again, i dont think someone like Josef Neugarten needs "pandering" to drive a car, even if in game. His onboard videos show clearly that the falloff of the tires can't be that dramatic, or else he can't go that sideways without spining, and instead he uses that to his advantage.

Not to mention other things like rally driving on tarmac, or even drifting would be nay on impossible.

So we even have visual confirmation that in that case, the sharp drop off from iRacing is wrong. And i say this because he is not an average Joe, he knows very well the limits of the real thing, where he should brake, etc. Now, you can still argue that he is overstepping these limits in game, but to say that ALL of them do that, unless they grew up with sims, and that there is this new "trend" of making sims too "easy", is a massive over reach.
You're missing the point a bit or anyway not reading what I've written very carefully. If you handcuffed Bruce Lee's arms behind his back, he would be a much less effective fighter (not the best analogy but serves the point). The majority of pro drivers (who are very ego oriented by nature due to their careers) come from real racing into sims with the expectation that the handcuffs they're wearing aren't going to affect them, and then they get frustrated when they inevitably do, and more often than not blame the sim itself. You wouldn't make Bruce Lee fight an amateur just so that he could still win as easily as when his hands were free. The skillset required to drive on a sim has a huge amount of overlap with real life, but it's absolutely not 1:1, you are objectively removing a huge portion of the inputs drivers use to feel the car in real life. They are naturally and absolutely unavoidably going to be worse at driving until they spend the time to dial into the inputs you do have on a sim. Guys that have taken the time to do that will only struggle if the car is actually wrong, guys that haven't (e.g. the majority of the Indycar drivers that participated in that series), will struggle regardless. The Conor Daly spin shows this pretty clearly; he's wayyy behind the car (in a way that would also cause a spin in real life in many circumstances), whereas Josef's real life onboards show super fast and predictive steering inputs. You see guys spin on ovals all the time in real life because it's not actually "easy" to catch these cars, you have to be dialed in. Again, it could still be an issue with the sim model, but you can't find out by driving like Conor in that video, and you need some sort of data, not just opinions, to support the claims.

The root problem is closer to a hardware issue than anything you can hope to "fix" in software. We have dealt with all sorts of drivers. Some guys are comfortable enough on sims to drive exactly like they do in the real car (given an accurate sim model), others struggle calibrating to the sense of speed (but can control the car fine if you help them with the mental calibration process), others struggle with being too late to corrections due to lacking sensory inputs (Gs, angular accels, etc), and others even drive far better in sims than they do in real life (yep! For a non-insignificant number of guys, especially ones who started racing on track later in life, sims are easier than real life as there are fewer distractions like vibration, bumps, noisy G forces, fear, doubt, etc). And these drivers will have these wildly different experiences driving the exact same car model!

It's a huge range, so if you start turning knobs to make it "easier" or "harder", you're just catering to one part of the audience (instead of taking all factors into account in a more scientific manner). Which is absolutely fine in a sim game context! But imo only if that's what you say you're doing.

"The biggest problem with sims is that nearly always the cars are too difficult to drive, and that there's a massive drop off in grip, either the front or the rear or both."

So I don't care at all if guys turn knobs in these games, it just shouldn't be at the blanket expense of the other products available (or the industry as a whole), especially when it is nothing more than an opinion.
 
Last edited:
Premium
This discussion reminded me of a Walt Whitman poem.

When I heard the learn’d astronomer,
When the proofs, the figures, were ranged in columns before me,
When I was shown the charts and diagrams, to add, divide, and measure them,
When I sitting heard the astronomer where he lectured with much applause in the lecture-room,
How soon unaccountable I became tired and sick,
Till rising and gliding out I wander’d off by myself,
In the mystical moist night-air, and from time to time,
Look’d up in perfect silence at the stars.
In 2024 that would be summarised as "Touch grass".
 
You're missing the point a bit or anyway not reading what I've written very carefully. If you handcuffed Bruce Lee's arms behind his back, he would be a much less effective fighter (not the best analogy but serves the point). The majority of pro drivers (who are very ego oriented by nature due to their careers) come from real racing into sims with the expectation that the handcuffs they're wearing aren't going to affect them, and then they get frustrated when they inevitably do, and more often than not blame the sim itself. You wouldn't make Bruce Lee fight an amateur just so that he could still win as easily as when his hands were free. The skillset required to drive on a sim has a huge amount of overlap with real life, but it's absolutely not 1:1, you are objectively removing a huge portion of the inputs drivers use to feel the car in real life. They are naturally and absolutely unavoidably going to be worse at driving until they spend the time to dial into the inputs you do have on a sim. Guys that have taken the time to do that will only struggle if the car is actually wrong, guys that haven't (e.g. the majority of the Indycar drivers that participated in that series), will struggle regardless. The Conor Daly spin shows this pretty clearly; he's wayyy behind the car (in a way that would also cause a spin in real life in many circumstances), whereas Josef's real life onboards show super fast and predictive steering inputs. You see guys spin on ovals all the time in real life because it's not actually "easy" to catch these cars, you have to be dialed in. Again, it could still be an issue with the sim model, but you can't find out by driving like Conor in that video, and you need some sort of data, not just opinions, to support the claims.

The root problem is closer to a hardware issue than anything you can hope to "fix" in software. We have dealt with all sorts of drivers. Some guys are comfortable enough on sims to drive exactly like they do in the real car (given an accurate sim model), others struggle calibrating to the sense of speed (but can control the car fine if you help them with the mental calibration process), others struggle with being too late to corrections due to lacking sensory inputs (Gs, angular accels, etc), and others even drive far better in sims than they do in real life (yep! For a non-insignificant number of guys, especially ones who started racing on track later in life, sims are easier than real life as there are fewer distractions like vibration, bumps, noisy G forces, fear, doubt, etc). And these drivers will have these wildly different experiences driving the exact same car model!

It's a huge range, so if you start turning knobs to make it "easier" or "harder", you're just catering to one part of the audience (instead of taking all factors into account in a more scientific manner). Which is absolutely fine in a sim game context! But imo only if that's what you say you're doing.

"The biggest problem with sims is that nearly always the cars are too difficult to drive, and that there's a massive drop off in grip, either the front or the rear or both."

So I don't care at all if guys turn knobs in these games, it just shouldn't be at the blanket expense of the other products available (or the industry as a whole), especially when it is nothing more than an opinion.
I think you are the one not reading me. I never said scientific standards should not apply. But your tire tests are meaningless, for a multitude of reasons. And therefore, your basis to say that a car is "harder", or "easier" than real life is absolutely flawed, and your opinions on the matter, if they are just based on "data", null and void.

So the truth is unless you are a real successfull real driver yourself, and happen to drive the same car irl as you do in game, and inputed all the data yourself, you just dont know. And if you don't know, maybe you should refrain from making wide sweeping statements about what drivers you don't know have to say, about the industry at large, or even about what the "audience" wants.

We can all recognize that some games are more "realistic" than others. But the buck stops at some point.

Just because AC had to "fudge" things, as in, had to deviate from your "real data", doesnt mean that it was an unrealistic knob to turn. Maybe, it was the knob that actually made the game more realistic. Or maybe, it was just the knob that made AC dumbed down, in comparison to other games out there. At the end of the day this matters very little according to you even, and people who play these games will draw their own conclusions.
 
Last edited:
This discussion reminded me of a Walt Whitman poem.

When I heard the learn’d astronomer,
When the proofs, the figures, were ranged in columns before me,
When I was shown the charts and diagrams, to add, divide, and measure them,
When I sitting heard the astronomer where he lectured with much applause in the lecture-room,
How soon unaccountable I became tired and sick,
Till rising and gliding out I wander’d off by myself,
In the mystical moist night-air, and from time to time,
Look’d up in perfect silence at the stars.
never thought I'd witness poetry about astronomy here!
 
I see a lot of people here falling into the same "binary behavior" they accuse sims of: if it's not 100% correct then it's crap. :D
Whos's saying that? I certainly am not. What I am trying to convey is: what IS 100% correct...and is it even possible with current home PC/console technology?

What I see are those saying the "data" is "this" and that is "correct".
 
Pro drivers are paid to understand the differences in how a car drives corner to corner in every phase of the corner, and that’s easy to transfer to the sim. Pro sim engineers make sure what the driver is saying makes sense vs the data, taking the perceptual differences, when present, into account. This would include calling a driver out for driving differently than the real car, or driving poorly on the sim in general. Telemetry is absolutely a useful and pretty much required tool in this process (at least for a few cars, which then determines the broader design of the sim and gives you a box to work in - for consumer sims there’s no need or possibility to do make every car hyper accurate, but you need a good behavior baseline). Something that Kunos did a good job at with AC; no, the individual cars are not necessarily very accurate, but all 200 or so have a cohesive design philosophy and they all for the most part drive like cars. You could do the same with a better baseline and end up with a better simulator (maybe not a better game though). iRacing a good example of the opposite; very little cohesion in their offerings so some cars are actually pretty decent and others are quite poor (fundamentally, not a “real car is a bit more understeery at high speeds” kind of thing).

The problem with perception is that everyone’s is different. It’s not measureable and varies massively from one driver to the next, some guys really struggle without the “seat of the pants” feeling, some simply do not. Just because a few Indycar drivers (many of whom did not grow up with sims or do not spend any appreciable time on them at home) who were forced to compete on iRacing complain about cars being too difficult does not mean they should be made easier (nor does it mean they’re not too difficult - point is that from that feedback alone, you can’t tell). The more you consider perception without data as reference, the more you end up catering to the lowest common denominator (or the average sim racer, who frankly does not have the necessary skillset to drive most racing cars, sim or real, quickly without crashing). Again, sim driving is a different skillset and people shouldn’t expect it to be the same. People are much more accepting of the other direction (“oh that sim driver had a hard time in the real car because it’s scary to go that fast and it’s a very overwhelming experience in general”) and don’t like to consider that real->sim has the same boundary that you can’t fix by just making the cars easier to drive or have more grip, etc. It’s a bit like paling water out of a sinking ship. Yes, it helps to remove the water, but you’ll still be at risk of sinking; if you had just fixed the hole in the hull, there wouldn’t be an issue to begin with. A bad sim driver will still crash a car that’s too easy to drive, a good sim driver will avoid crashing one that’s too difficult; but the good driver at least has a chance of relaying that it’s too difficult, where the bad driver will always think it’s too difficult. Simply put, if your perception is that you should be able to brake 100m later than you do in reality, it’s not a problem with the sim.
I totally agree about perception being different, but what I am saying is there should be some allowance for those who need "seat of the pants" feel (and not falsely replicated via the ffb...I've never liked that, just confuses me with the wheel pulling to simulate the movement of the chassis).

I find it worrysome you use a term like "lowest common denominator"....that sound like Sim eliteists talk to me, and at the end of the day these "sims" are really computer games. And no I don't think anyone expects to brake 100m later and still make a corner. That's hyperbole to make a flawed point IMO. Not eveyone saying cars don't have enough grip are "bad" drivers.
 
And no I don't think anyone expects to brake 100m later and still make a corner. That's hyperbole to make a flawed point IMO.
You would be surprised then (especially if you consider input from non pro drivers). 100m is a case we have had before at a fast track with a (gold rated, very fast) pro driver. Felt like the 100m board in real life, was more like the 200 board in sim and real life (within 2 meters of each other, sim being on the later side). Track model and board placement was accurate, car model was accurate. If you made the car capable of braking at the 100 board, it would be 4s a lap too quick and brake probably 30m too late on average. And be useless for the other pro driver who did not have that perceptual bias. There is never a “right” answer when you start catering to perception, as everyone’s is different. Which is my pretty logically founded point.

Not eveyone saying cars don't have enough grip are "bad" drivers.
Which is something I explicitly said in the same post you’re quoting.

Just because a few Indycar drivers (many of whom did not grow up with sims or do not spend any appreciable time on them at home) who were forced to compete on iRacing complain about cars being too difficult does not mean they should be made easier (nor does it mean they’re not too difficult - point is that from that feedback alone, you can’t tell).
And you might as well consider the full quote, nothing elitist here.
The more you consider perception without data as reference, the more you end up catering to the lowest common denominator (or the average sim racer, who frankly does not have the necessary skillset to drive most racing cars, sim or real, quickly without crashing).
Just saying you can’t take feedback at face value because there are way too many variables to consider, and with sims it’s as likely to be perceptual bias as something actually wrong with the car. Lowest common denominator is the one who has the biggest issue with the sim and makes the most noise about it, usually also correlates with the one who has spent the least amount of time on sims.
 
So the truth is unless you are a real successfull real driver yourself, and happen to drive the same car irl as you do in game, and inputed all the data yourself, you just dont know. And if you don't know, maybe you should refrain from making wide sweeping statements about what drivers you don't know have to say, about the industry at large, or even about what the "audience" wants.
Unfortunately, the same can be said of your statements.

At least the other guy in this discussion is... you know... more qualified to talk about simulation :)
 
You would be surprised then (especially if you consider input from non pro drivers). 100m is a case we have had before at a fast track with a (gold rated, very fast) pro driver. Felt like the 100m board in real life, was more like the 200 board in sim and real life (within 2 meters of each other, sim being on the later side). Track model and board placement was accurate, car model was accurate. If you made the car capable of braking at the 100 board, it would be 4s a lap too quick and brake probably 30m too late on average. And be useless for the other pro driver who did not have that perceptual bias. There is never a “right” answer when you start catering to perception, as everyone’s is different. Which is my pretty logically founded point.


Which is something I explicitly said in the same post you’re quoting.


And you might as well consider the full quote, nothing elitist here.

Just saying you can’t take feedback at face value because there are way too many variables to consider, and with sims it’s as likely to be perceptual bias as something actually wrong with the car. Lowest common denominator is the one who has the biggest issue with the sim and makes the most noise about it, usually also correlates with the one who has spent the least amount of time on sims.
Oh no no, hold on, you are not wiggling your way out of that now. You said specifically that "consumer" sims all have too much grip, according to your mythical data, and that Ben Collins is wrong, because he didnt "grew up with sims", while also generalizing his statements to everybody who has the same opinion, regardless if they are even the current indy 500 champ, and ignoring what all our eyes can see in his onboards in the video. So now you are coming up with some example of someone whose opinion cannot be trusted because he was trying to go beyond the limit in game, and therefore people like Josef Neugarten and everybody else are not to be trusted by proxy?

You are now trying to make it like its all about "perception", when you started this whole conversation with that all sims are too "grippy", and implying its because devs are listening to real drivers like Ben Collins who are not simracers, while parading the argument that you have the "real data" to prove this.

And as i expected, this now became a rethoric discussion, rather than a "scientific" one, because your data argument was already debunked pages ago.
 
Oh no no, hold on, you are not wiggling your way out of that now. You said specifically that "consumer" sims all have too much grip, according to your mythical data, and that Ben Collins is wrong, because he didnt "grew up with sims", while also generalizing his statements to everybody who has the same opinion, regardless if they are even the current indy 500 champ, and ignoring what all our eyes can see in his onboards in the video. So now you are coming up with some example of someone whose opinion cannot be trusted because he was trying to go beyond the limit in game, and therefore people like Josef Neugarten and everybody else are not to be trusted by proxy?

You are now trying to make it like its all about "perception", when you started this whole conversation with that all sims are too "grippy", and implying its because devs are listening to real drivers like Ben Collins who are not simracers, while parading the argument that you have the "real data" to prove this.

And as i expected, this now became a rethoric discussion, rather than a "scientific" one, because your data argument was already debunked pages ago.
None of this is really logical enough nor puts enough effort into understanding the arguments at hand (to the point where it almost reads as trolling) to bother responding to, but out of outright curiosity, what you think debunked the "data argument"? :roflmao:
 
I can look him up, know of his work, and even recently seen him do this type of work.

Happy to read up on what you bring to the table :)
Good for you then, but i don't need a fanboy to suck up to me, so i don't need to tell you anything, the people who know me know who i am, what i do, and i know what other people also do :)

Its funny how every time i discuss anything with him around here, some minion always runs to tell me how "important" he is, after he already told everybody how "important" he is with every chance he gets. Maybe because usually the arguments can't stand to scrutiny, and me and others are pesky enough to call them out.

Here is a crazy idea though, how about we all go back on topic, or drop this, because me (and i am sure Kenny and others) are not interested in resume comparisons :)
 
None of this is really logical enough nor puts enough effort into understanding the arguments at hand (to the point where it almost reads as trolling) to bother responding to, but out of outright curiosity, what you think debunked the "data argument"? :roflmao:
You know as well as me that the data you speak off usually isn't all done in the same way, with the same conditions, using always a new tire. Also, post peak measurements are rare, and subject to even bigger margins for error. Add that to the margin of error and deviations of input the results into mathematical models, and your 100% certainties start to get very shaky, specially if they don't match real life observations, which most of the "classical" curves don't.

You see, you are not the only one that looked into tire data.


But good job trying to discredit a tiny portion of what i said, instead of addressig your own broad sweep statements delivered with the utmost certainty :)

And its funny, you accuse me of "trolling", and yet, you are the one that says that what Josef Neugarten says can't be trusted, while i am the one giving the beneffit of the doubt to either him, Ben Collins, or whoever, instead of making claims about other people's credentials to speak, or how "realistic" the other games are.

I wonder how is the weather up that horse...
 
Good for you then, but i don't need a fanboy to suck up to me, so i don't need to tell you anything, the people who know me know who i am, what i do, and i know what other people also do :)

Its funny how every time i discuss anything with him around here, some minion always runs to tell me how "important" he is, after he already told everybody how "important" he is with every chance he gets. Maybe because usually the arguments can't stand to scrutiny, and me and others are pesky enough to call them out.

Here is a crazy idea though, how about we all go back on topic, or drop this, because me (and i am sure Kenny and others) are not interested in resume comparisons :)
Then how do I - someone interested in the conversation, take your “scrutiny” as something of any value?
 

Latest News

Article information

Author
Yannik Haustein
Article read time
5 min read
Views
14,761
Comments
280
Last update
Back
Top