That's very cool, but I bet you any good european race car with a third of that corvette's horses would beat you because everybody knows american road cars were bad at cornering, so the homologues racing cars for sure were better but still not good enough as a well done chassis/suspension the euro cars.I drove SCCA races in California in the 60s (Yes, I am almost too old to remember!). Those days without 'down-force' were interesting and exciting. I drove one race with a 500 hp, blown, injected Corvette. You didn't corner with the wheel, you twitched the wheel and navigated the corner with the accelerator. Very different from driving today. Even if you don't like the looks of the classic machines, learning to race them competitively on the original tracks would be a real learning experience if your only experience is with high down-force, modern racing machines.
Well many modern cars are ugly and slowI know, most of the people does. For me they are ugly and slow.
NICE...
Coming to which title???
yes, with all time peak ( on steam only) up to 34 people ( which actually doesn't sound accurate at all)I wonder why Grand Prix Legends is still going strong after 20 Years?
They are gradually updating the physics to older cars, so I guess it depends on what "last year" means. But I'm probably not the right person to ask about physics, since I don't really see anything particularly wrong with even the old physics. And I would certainly say it's good, Raceroom is still my favorite sim.How is raceroom since last year?, did they improved physics?, I'll love to give a second chance because I just drove mostly the AMG GT3 and back then I was complaining about the game but might be just the cars that they are boring to hell. I never tried the classic content. It's good?
Yes, yes are super ugly and super slow, just like this, no?:
Try to convince me that those two are ugly!
View attachment 296420
This is 40+ years old so it must be a classic ugly and slow.
And as the sims get better the mix between new and classic is even more enjoyable
A new project is always a risk. That being said GTL was focused on older content and I think it sold enough to earn its development back. When it comes to historic content I think the title could be a lot more succesful today than it was in 2006. We have big events like goodwood which draws big crowds and offers amazing racing. We have bigger audience to sell. Although development costs are up as well. I'd still say there is very much a market for a sim that focuses on older cars. Licensing is probably difficult but gtl did that too. I think historic race cars are trendy enough now to do something with it. Even with assetto corsa it really took off when the ferrari f40 was added. I don't think ac would have had as wide appeal if it had just focused on modern trendy cars.Yes but like i said, sim racing as a whole is already a niche market. In order to get the investment needed you have to be convinced of its success, hence why the most ‘trendy’ content is largely focused on.
Would more old stuff be cool to see? Absolutely. Could a dev take a risk and be successful? Sure. But its just that, a risk. A bigger one than if they stick to something with guaranteed success.
At one point in time in simracing there was even an open source racing sim being developed. I don't think it got anywhere. Crowdsourcing is just a way to get the budget. What you'd need is the key people that are incredibly difficult to get. The physics programmer (not the one who puts in physics values to build cars) is the one person that just don't exist. Without that you are left with using an existing engine and its existing feature list and not add much to it except the content. That basically gives you three options. Rf1, rf2 and assetto and going through the reiza route.Why not start a crowdfunded project? see how many people are really willing to put money down for vintage content.
And whats wrong with doing something like that? People here seem to crave vintage content, then lets make some. We already have plenty great sim platforms to choose from. I dont think a brand new engine would need to be developed at all.Without that you are left with using an existing engine and not add much to it. That basically gives you three options. Rf1, rf2 and assetto and going through the reiza route.
And whats wrong with doing something like that? People here seem to crave vintage content, then lets make some. We already have plenty great sim platforms to choose from. I dont think a brand new engine would need to be developed at all.
Sounds like a cool idea, Goodwood Revival: The Sim Count me in.
more sound
I don't think it is odd at all. Every sim you buy you want it to be something better and fresh. If it is just new graphics with rf1, rf2 or assetto base then why not play one of those existing games which already have much bigger car and track rosters? It also comes to the price. How much is base game rf1/rf2/assetto with just historical cars really worth it? 60€, 40€ or 20€? Dirt rally 2.0 can ask for 80€ because at least technically they have made a step forward from dirt rally. Even if it is high it is justifiable.Just seems odd to feel the need to make a 'sizeable step forwards' on the game engine considering the topic is simply about the lack of vintage content.
If content is what is wanted then it can happen, quite easily. But i think it needs more than a few people saying "yeah i like old cars" (which is mostly what I'm seeing here) for anyone to be convinced its worth their while.