DiRT Rally 2.0 DiRT Rally 2.0 | Colin McRae Pack Previews

[Paul Jeffrey]

Codemasters have released a couple of interesting videos around the upcoming Colin McRae DLC - set to hit the game this March 24th.

Many believe the upcoming Colin McRae DLC will be the final piece of new content coming to DiRT Rally 2.0 before development comes to an end with this impressive rally simulation, and if so the inclusion of content around one of the most spectacular drivers in the history of World Rally is indeed a smart one - and something I'm personally very much looking forward to trying out for myself.

In the first 'scenario'' video, we see Codemasters John Armstrong tackling the 1988 Scottish Rally in McRae's Ford Sierra Cosworth. The objective here is to complete the final stages of the rally in McRae's bid to win his first national championship... fun!

The second preview video of the series takes players to 1991 onboard Colin McRae's damaged Subaru Legacy Group A WRC car, as the Scottish superstar looks to try and finish the Wales Rally GB in front of an adoring home crowd. Can you finish the rally, where McRae couldn't?

The Colin McRae Flat Out DLC is set to release for DiRT Rally 2.0 this March 24th, and will contain two new cars in the form of the Subaru Impreza S4 Rally and the Legacy RS, plus new rally stages in the Scottish Highlands of Perth and Kinross as well as various Colin McRae themed challenges and scenarios.

The new pack will be available as a stand alone DLC, or free for season pass owners of the game.

Original Source: Codemasters

DiRT Rally 2.0 is available now on Xbox One, PS4 and PC.

Got questions? Post them in the DiRT Rally 2.0 sub forum and let the community help you out!

 

[David Faraday]

I have nothing but programs on it. No extra files. All steam so there is nothing to put elsewhere. Still dont like the practise. Make it optional. Everyone happy.

You can have steam install games (or move them) to another drive. It's what I do. 3 or 4 games on my ssd and everything else on a bigger drive. You're moaning about nothing.

 

[Eckhart von Glan]

yep, same here. with the free content for rre at the moment i will probably reinstall it and point steam to my slower harddrive while my go to games acc and iRacing rule supreme on the direct drive.

 

[Case_]

Would you buy an album that had 8 songs initially for full price, but later on the band kept releasing other songs to make it up to 20 for 4 times the price? No.

You mean like release subsequent singles from a new album album with unreleased songs as B-sides, like it was (is?) often done for decades? Yes, of course I would if it was an artist I cared about enough. Why wouldn't I?

 

[Rob Every]

You see the problem don't you? How old are you?

I am in my late 40's and come from a generation where a developer wrote a game then nurtured it and looked after it for a few years afterwards, patched it, improved it, or realised it bombed and moved on to the next game, took the loss.

Now, these companies are under immense pressure to make more and more money, so release half finished games with the least content possible and release endless DLC to make a game really worth 40 quid actually make over 100 quid. Why, because they KNOW how naieve you are about value and how easy they manipulate your ability to say no.

Yes, it is your money, you can spend it where you want, but have a thought at what precedent you are setting for game developers, your selfishness, desperation, over eager spending simply means they win, get to keep on releasing sub standard software at an extortionate price. Their games will not improve, they only will as most do because of improved tech and the like, is the modern game better in every way than older ones? In some ways yes in many no.

Be honest now, if there was no online gaming and you had to buy everything in a shop still, would you pay 100 pounds for a game?

if you would it is clear this argument is pointless as you have no clear understanding of value and would simply way as much as they say to play their games, like people who pay 1 grand to see Madonna or Kate Bush, or queue for days to buy an Iphone.

 

[Case_]

You see the problem don't you? How old are you?

I am in my late 40's and come from a generation where a developer wrote a game then nurtured it and looked after it for a few years afterwards, patched it, improved it, or realised it bombed and moved on to the next game, took the loss.

I don't see how my age is relevant at all to this discussion, but I'll humor you. I'm in my 40's too. Been gaming all my life since I was 10. And if you really think your description of "how it used to be" is an accurate overall description of how it was "back in the day", then I'd say you're remembering things with strongly rose-tinted glasses. Plenty of games were released as-is, often in questionable state, and then never touched again, despite sometimes even gamebreaking bugs. In fact I would go as far as to say that nowadays, game support has actually improved quite a lot.

I also don't understand your question. Would I pay 100 pounds if it meant paying say 50 up front for the main game and then get additional content pieces for 5-10 pounds every month or so? Yes, of course, if I liked the game and liked the content? Why not? Why does that mean I have no clear understanding of value? At best it means I have a different understanding of value than you, but it certainly doesn't mean I have *no* understanding of value, that's just you trying to make your opinion seem more relevant than mine.

Would I pay 100 pounds at once for a game? Unlikely. But that has nothing to do with DLC or online distribution. I simply wouldn't pay 100 pounds for a game at once, not even now. Hence why I'm not able to test the AMS2 beta like many more fortunate people (and trust me, I would *really* love to, if only to be able to voice opinion on things before they are finalized).

Also, you didn't respond at what I said at all. You gave an example with a music album, I pointed out that what you described has been common practice for decades. So how are DLCs any different than the singles featuring B-sides? Wouldn't you get a single of a band you really enjoy with an additional song not available on the album, even though you already bought the album? It's the exact same thing as paying for a DLC pack for a game.

And finally...if someone wants to pay a grand to see Madonna or Kate Bush or wants to stand in a queue for hours to get a new iPhone...then that's their choice, isn't it? Should I be offended by that and complain that they ruin the market for the rest of us or whatever? I really don't see the point. I mean I absolutely think it's kinda dumb to do that, but they clearly don't, so...why should I care? It's their life and their money/time. Should I pick up a soapbox and go explain to them how dumb I think it is?

 

[Alex72]

You can have steam install games (or move them) to another drive. It's what I do. 3 or 4 games on my ssd and everything else on a bigger drive. You're moaning about nothing.

I dont have another drive, and no its not "moaning" not wanting companies to install hundreds of gigs of things you dont need or use.

"Its a better practice to have to install **** you dont need and then go uninstall it. Or why not spend money that you might not have to get more drives just because companies fill your drive with things you cant use or dont want to use".

Sure... This is the reason it will get even worse. Because its better to be forced to install things and then have to uninstall it rather than having an option to install it if you want to. Why is an option to install such a big deal to you? You think buying more drives is a better solution or to have to uninstall instead of having the option from the start? Thats all i ever said. Weird position to hold when they can make it optional just like MOST DLC's...

 

[Majuh]

Why is an option to install such a big deal to you? You think buying more drives is a better solution or to have to uninstall instead of having the option from the start? Thats all i ever said. Weird position to hold when they can make it optional just like MOST DLC's...

Codemasters can't do that due to the way the filesystem of their game engine works.

 

[Rob Every]

OK.

We shall have to agree to disagree, you completely fail to miss the point that paying almost twice as much for an incomplete basic game plus DLC simply means that companies will increase costs and do this more than actually doing anything else like making good, complete games in the first place as they used to. YOU are setting the trend, not the game companies, they are tempting you, you are too weak to say no because you have too much money and too little appreciation that doing this simply makes them realise they can charge more and more and more. You treat these people like Demigods, they can do no wrong, they are sweatshops man, full of kids on minimum wage doing shifts to QA test games for release because there is a penalty clause if they don't. That is not something I willingly buy into like you seem to.

It is your money, yes, you can spend it on what you want. But what you are doing is akin to panic buying, selfish. If gamers just stepped back a bit, as they did with the loot boxes, then games companies would stop doing this, make complete, full games from the start and DLC would largely become irrelevant.

Sadly, gamers are easily persuaded, weak minded, easy to please, with full wallets and nothing else to do, and games companies employ people to exploit this, and tempt them. They don't HAVE to do this, they could release the game complete, for 40-50 quid and be done with it patches etc, but hey these guys are easy to exploit, let's tie them into passes, we can make another 50 quid out of them. If you LIKE that, I am somewhat surprised.

One good example, Playstation online, why is anyone PAYING to be ALLOWED to play games online, it is utterly ludicrous, yet like dumbass Hindu cows or lemmings, 80% of them do, making a company already worth billions of free money for doing pretty nothing but hosting servers and allowing you to play garbage for a month and then give it back! It is a joke. Yet you all bloody do it I find it staggering, it's almost lie being charged for oxygen it's so ridiculous.

If you are the same age as me roughly you clearly didn't buy games as much as I did, as I cannot recall buying a game in the 80's or 90's say, then having to buy loads of extra stuff for it, you just bought the game, it happened a bit on the PC games later on but only on things like Half Life, it was very, very rare.

Now it happens with just about every game released started with map packs etc for CoD, why do you think that is? Is it because they want to provide it free for the love of the game? Very rarely, only Polyphony really do this, everybody else seems to think that releasing a game that is part finished is fine, for full price, then double that income by trying to tie people into passes and DLC models.

Do you not see that is not a great model for consumers long term? It just means more cost for you, more profit for them, why do you think that is a GOOD thing? I don't get it.

if you are happy with that, fair does, but, you will be part of an ever decreasing number of people who can afford it.

 

[Eckhart von Glan]

If I remember correctly, Colin McRae Rally 2 had six locations with 6 or 8 original stages, some as short as a minute, others as long as 3, maybe 4 minutes. There were the then current WRC cars and other car classes like kit cars and historic cars. I do not remember exactly, but probably five classes of five cars each? There was alsoa game mode where you could play against AI in a short track mode in all six locations (totally loved that) On release the game did not need a patch, you paid sth. like 40 Euros and that was that. Later people started to produce skins which you could put into the game.

I am of course by no means sure if my memory serves me right, would be awesome if someome could dig out the original disc and check.

Also, I am too lazy to check what Dirt Rally 2.0 cost on release and how much content was in it.

If someone could do that, one could actually compare what was on offer 20 years ago and what is today.

 

[shadow118]

Also, I am too lazy to check what Dirt Rally 2.0 cost on release and how much content was in it.

DiRT Rally 2.0 had 6 rally locations (USA, Australia, New Zealand, Spain, Argentina and Poland) and 8 rallycross locations (Mettet, Trois-Rivieres, Silverstone, Loheac, Hell, Montalegre, Holjes, Catalunya).
DLC added an extra 6 rally locations (Sweden, Monte Carlo, Wales, Greece, Finland and Germany) and extra 5 rallycross locations (Yas Marina, Lydden Hill, Estering, Bikernieki and Killarney) and the Dirtfish freeroam area.
14 locations in basegame + 12 in DLC, in total 26 locations.
It had 52 cars in the basegame and another 29 added with DLC, for a total of 81 cars

For comparison DiRT 4 had 5 rally locations (Australia, Spain, Sweden, USA and Wales) and 5 rallycross locations (Lydden Hill, Holjes, Hell, Montalegre, Loheac) and 3 landrush locations (California, Nevada and Baja) and Dirtfish freeroam area
In total 14 locations.
It had 55 cars, no DLC

DiRT Rally had 6 rally locations (Sweden, Monte Carlo, Wales, Greece, Finland and Germany) 3 rallycross locations (Lydden Hill, Hell and Holjes) and 1 hillclimb location (Pikes Peak),
in total 10 locations.
It had 46 cars, no DLC

Going even more back, DiRT 3 had 4 rally locations (Finland, Kenya, Michigan, Norway), 4 rallycross locations (Smelter, L.A. Coliseum, Monaco and Aspen) and 1 joyride location (Battersea)
DLC added 1 rally locaton (Monte Carlo) and 1 rallycross location (Shibuya),
9 locations in basegame + 2 in DLC, in total 11 locations.
It had 49 cars in the basegame and another 13 added with DLC, for a total of 62 cars.

@Rob Every how exactly is DiRT Rally 2.0 incomplete?

 

[Eckhart von Glan]

DiRT 3 … DLC added 1 rally locaton (Monte Carlo)

haha, and perennial non DLC buyer me never bothered to pick it up

 

[Majuh]

If I remember correctly, Colin McRae Rally 2 had six locations with 6 or 8 original stages, some as short as a minute, others as long as 3, maybe 4 minutes. There were the then current WRC cars and other car classes like kit cars and historic cars. I do not remember exactly, but probably five classes of five cars each? There was alsoa game mode where you could play against AI in a short track mode in all six locations (totally loved that) On release the game did not need a patch, you paid sth. like 40 Euros and that was that. Later people started to produce skins which you could put into the game.

I am of course by no means sure if my memory serves me right, would be awesome if someome could dig out the original disc and check.

Apparantly Colin McRae Rally 2.0 had 8 locations with 10-11 stages (this includes special stages), but it only had 14 cars in total.

 

[Ole Marius Myrvold]

Apparantly Colin McRae Rally 2.0 had 8 locations with 10-11 stages (this includes special stages), but it only had 14 cars in total.

Yup, I have actually played this game a bit lately.
10 stages in every country, 1SSS in 4 of them. One SSS not connected to any rally, but in an own gamemode. Also Arcade-mode with 6 cars on circuits, which are based on rallies, so additional tracks there.
Not 10 unique stages per rally though, some stages are run backwards, and it seems to be at least 1, maybe 2 very short stages in each rally (not including SSS), I have finished a stage in less than a minute...

 

[Rob Every]

I am not saying Dirt 2 is incomplete NOW, I am saying it was on release, not now, but you (if you paid) have had to buy all the extra stuff, and some of it just detailed upgrades of Dr1 cars and stages, that is plainly a bit of a con.

This is 2020, PC console have more storage, more space, ever increasing graphics capability yet we have not moved on that much, because of profit and money and exploitation.

My opinion, not fact, just the way I see devs pushing their addiction these days.

 

[Eckhart von Glan]

14 locations in basegame … It had 52 cars in the basegame

… I am saying it was [incomplete] on release ...

Rob, I am totally getting your gripe about all those subscriptions and other schemes trying to wrangle as much money out of software as possible, and I still feel as a Dirt Rally owner one should have gotten 50% off the old Dirt Rally stages. But to me, the Dirt Rally 2 basegame looks fairly comprehensive already, so all DLC really is an individual decision by the people playing the game. If one could not play it meaningfully without the DLC, I'd be in your camp.

Also: thx guys for correcting me on the content of the old McRae2 title, I have since been trying to piece together the locations and realize my memory has not stored it anywhere. And we only had 14 cars? God, we were easy to please ...

 

[Warren Dawes]

Yup, I have actually played this game a bit lately.

Hi Ole Marius. I still have my old CMR2 cd's, does it run normally on recent systems (eg. Win7) or do you have to make special adjustments? Since I'm stuck at home most of the day at the moment, I wouldn't mind reviving it.
Cheers, Warren.

 

[Eckhart von Glan]

Watch some gameplay vids on YouTube first, Warren. That sort of turned me off. Plus: I sold my CDs years and years ago. Greetings to down under, where you guys survived the flames only to encounter the dreaded virus, oh dear. Home office here …

 

[Ole Marius Myrvold]

Hi Ole Marius. I still have my old CMR2 cd's, does it run normally on recent systems (eg. Win7) or do you have to make special adjustments? Since I'm stuck at home most of the day at the moment, I wouldn't mind reviving it.
Cheers, Warren.

It works fine. I do have a small graphical glitch at times. It happens before I start driving on a stage, or after I've finished. It just removes all textures on everything. Which makes it look quite funky. However, that's only during the countdown before you start driving, or in the little time after finishing the stage, before your times pops up. So not really any issue.
Other than that I cannot say I remember any issues. I actually managed to find a patch for the game(!) which made my xbox controller work completely differently, so that was... interesting!
But, Win 10 64-bit. No actual gameplay issues to report on. Other than that you might remember that the driving and graphics were a bit better than they actually are! Still fun though!

 

[bogani]

I am not saying Dirt 2 is incomplete NOW, I am saying it was on release, not now, but you (if you paid) have had to buy all the extra stuff, and some of it just detailed upgrades of Dr1 cars and stages, that is plainly a bit of a con.

This is 2020, PC console have more storage, more space, ever increasing graphics capability yet we have not moved on that much, because of profit and money and exploitation.

My opinion, not fact, just the way I see devs pushing their addiction these days.

Who decides when something is complete or not? How do you estimate that it's worth 40 quids?

As it turns out DR2.0 had about as much content as CMR2.0(the glory days when they released finished products, right?). And you know what, there's a big chance you paid more for a boxed copy of CMR2.0 than you bought DR2.0 for, and games didn't exactly become cheaper to produce. Heck, games must be one of the few if not the only thing that still costs the same amount now as they did 30 years ago.

 

[Wolfzz]

It's out now just a small 20gig update ha, cant wait to try it out thanks Codemasters hope to see you with Dirt Rally 3.0 in the future to give WRC 9, 10 and 11 in the coming years a run for their money.