Why is the C9 modeled as only the Le Mans variant?

[kondor999]

The C9 is currently useless for any track except Le Mans. And Le Mans isn't even in the game. Why didn't Kunos model both the Le Mans variant (used for a single race) and the Sprint variant (used for everything else)? Of the two, I'd much rather have the Sprint version.

No one uses the C9 right now. It's an understeering pig that transitions to sudden power-oversteer, because it's not running its intended aero package. It's a horrible car that few enjoy because of this bizarre decision to go with the one-off Le Mans low-downforce version.

Sauber would never have taken this variant to any of the tracks that are actually in AC. Why should I?

 

[kondor999]

I hope that, just like they did with the F40, the 458 and quite a few other vehicles, KS chooses to give us purely fictional (for the Lawyers out there) settings for "High Downforce Config" in the Aero section of these protoypes (because now I'm worried about the 787b).

Surely that's not a whole new version of the licensed vehicle - It's merely a setup parameter. The likeness of the vehicle stays the same, just like the "S3" F40 doesn't look like the LM (but drives that way, which is all I care about really).

Now obviously only KS knows for sure how much leeway they've got on this. It's just a little hard to believe that the Licensing car company is going to fret about the exact kg of downforce on the left front wheel, at this angle of incidence, at this speed, at this barometric pressure and ambient temp, etc. If these licensing deals were that specific with regards to physics, I doubt you could ever recreate any car at all.

 

[Gergo Panker]

Ferrari didn't give permission for the 458 Challenge or F40LM. If they did, they wouldnt be under some quasi-fictional Step 3 package.

Unless it has to do with allowing modifications per se but not licensing other specific branded products of the manufacturer. The tuner cars in the Japanese pack are also fictional step versions, yet there are brands where you see none of those albeit the brands themselves being popular for their real-life mods.

 

[Radu Oros]

Everything is so easy for backseat commentators, just like in football. The critics always know better than the coach, the president, and the whole staff in the club.

 

[Brandon Wright]

Natedogg1867:

Are you seriously saying that Mercedes would go into the setup screen for the C9 and nitpick over the downforce settings? That a dev would be violating their license agreement if, say, the car's suspension settings didn't exactly match the real car?

Look at Forza Motorsport. For God's sake, you can switch engines in licensed cars in that game. All of them. Even the Porsches. You can add all sorts of aftermarket wings and crap. Did they just happen to get a way more lenient license? In FM4, for instance, you could remove the "restrictor" on their C9 and get a much more powerful variant. You could have wider front tires, and so forth.

By your logic, Mercedes should've swooped in and shut them down or made them pay a separate licensing fee for every possible permutation (ie hundreds of them) that arose from the players modding the C9 in the typical Forza manner. Clearly that's not the case. How come the Forza C9 is completely moddable, but the AC one is set in stone and you'd have to (presumably) pay a new licensing fee if you, for instance, changed the allowable toe-out settings on the right front wheel?

Look at it from Merc's (or any manufacturer's) point of view. You have Forza, possibly the biggest name in all of arcade racing, wanting to put your car in their game that will likely see millions and millions of players putting their eyes on your car. As a manufacturer, you absolutely want that, but Forza is a big enough franchise (funded by the mighty Microsoft) that Turn10 is in a position where they get to make some demands and can say to Merc "Hey, if you want your product in our massive franchise then we want it to be fully adjustable". Merc replies "But we only want the Le Mans version in the game" to which Turn10 replies "Ok, nevermind then, good luck getting this much exposure of your product on another racing title". Merc hangs its head and says "Ok, ok, the car can be fully adjustable. The value of having the car in the Forza franchise outweighs our desires".

Now you have this small, independent developer from Italy knock on your door asking if they can please feature your historic C9 in their newish PC-only racing sim that has maybe a few hundred thousand people playing it (a fraction of the Forza audience). In this scenario Merc is the one in the position to make demands because having their car in this small, indie title is not likely to provide nearly as much return as a console game that's literally a household name, so they can afford to pass on this opportunity if it doesn't suit their desires. So they tell this small Italian indie developer "Yes, you can feature our C9 in your little PC game but we only want the Le Mans version featured and will not allow it to be adjusted in any way that doesn't jive with the Le Mans configuration". The little Italian dev doesn't have much clout in this scenario but they know having the C9 (in any configuration) will be a big boost for their up and coming game so they agree to the terms Merc has laid before them and players end up with a Le Mans only version that can't be tuned to have more downforce.

Obviously I'm guessing at some of that, but now you have a very likely scenario of how two racing game developers end up with two totally different licenses pertaining to the same car. As NateDog said, no two licenses are the same and each manufacturer will grant license agreements that will be of the most benefit to themselves. Forza likely provides far more benefit just due to the sheer number of sales and thus are likely able to make demands that smaller developers can't get away with.

 

[Gergo Panker]

Just to stay on topic, ladies and gentlemen, I'm gonna present you with two possible scenarios as an attempt to provide an adequate explanation for what will rightfully go down in history lane as "stage-gate".
May you pick your favoured one and swallow it with some festive meal characteristic of your respective homelands.
Brace yourselves for it is but an easy ride filled with controversies, intricacy, and conspiracy, suited for those with the strongest of stomachs and bravest of hearts (yes, I did go as far as to use the Oxford-comma, deal with it!).

The Mercedes C9 Sprint version is not included in Assetto Corsa due to:

1: being part of a licence limitation - which are understandably and traditionally undisclosed for mere players of the game - that somehow prevents developers from including any modifications of the original car for which they originally obtained the licence in the first place.

2: said developer upon gauging the sheer breadth of chaos, disruption and mayhem such misjudged omission could potentially cause in our beloved simracing community, literally affecting the lives of tens of people, decided to deliberately and purposefully leave out the aforementioned vehicle because THEY JUST WANT TO WATCH THE WORLD BURN!

+1 for good measure: they had forgotten.

 

[kondor999]

Everything is so easy for backseat commentators, just like in football. The critics always know better than the coach, the president, and the whole staff in the club.

Who here is claiming to somehow know more than KS, who gave us this fantastic driving simulator?

The C9 is a good car. I want it to be an even better, more historically accurate car to drive on the tracks we actually have available in AC, rather than a version that was heavily optimized for a track (Le Mans) that will never be in the game. What, in all that, could be labeled as "backseat commentating"?

I'm respectfully requesting and suggesting that KS consider applying the same "S1" upgrade system that they're already using for many licensed vehicles already. If that's not an option, then why not include a "High Downforce Package" setting in the Aero setup section to accomplish the same thing? These are what are known as "suggestions". I'm not saying I know more than anyone else.

I really, really do not want this discussion to devolve into bashing Kunos. I'm just a customer making a suggestion and wondering why things are the way they are, because the explanations so far haven't made much sense.

 

[Tom Blackett]

The second one?

 

[Brandon Wright]

Who here is claiming to somehow know more than KS, who gave us this fantastic driving simulator?

The C9 is a good car. I want it to be an even better, more historically accurate car to drive on the tracks we actually have available in AC, rather than a version that was heavily optimized for a track (Le Mans) that will never be in the game. What, in all that, could be labeled as "backseat commentating"?

I'm respectfully requesting and suggesting that KS consider applying the same "S1" upgrade system that they're already using for many licensed vehicles already. If that's not an option, then why not include a "High Downforce Package" setting in the Aero setup section to accomplish the same thing? These are what are known as "suggestions". I'm not saying I know more than anyone else.

I really, really do not want this discussion to devolve into bashing Kunos. I'm just a customer making a suggestion and wondering why things are the way they are, because the explanations so far haven't made much sense.

It's really probably as simple as Merc saying "You can have our car but you will only use ze Le Mans configuration", while other manufacturers like Ferrari have said "Yeah, sure, you can make a S1 version that has the same specs as the 458 Challenge car, no problem". Kunos can't just make a stepped version of any car they feel like without the manufacturer's permission, some will allow it, some won't, and apparently Mercedes won't allow the sprint version to be done under the existing license agreement (by way of a stepped version or just adjusting the car settings). I agree with you that it would be nice to have both versions, but if the Germans said "Nein" then there's probably not much Kunos can do about it no matter how badly we want them to.

 

[kondor999]

Look at it from Merc's (or any manufacturer's) point of view. You have Forza, possibly the biggest name in all of arcade racing, wanting to put your car in their game that will likely see millions and millions of players putting their eyes on your car. As a manufacturer, you absolutely want that, but Forza is a big enough franchise (funded by the mighty Microsoft) that Turn10 is in a position where they get to make some demands and can say to Merc "Hey, if you want your product in our massive franchise then we want it to be fully adjustable". Merc replies "But we only want the Le Mans version in the game" to which Turn10 replies "Ok, nevermind then, good luck getting this much exposure of your product on another racing title". Merc hangs its head and says "Ok, ok, the car can be fully adjustable. The value of having the car in the Forza franchise outweighs our desires".

Now you have this small, independent developer from Italy knock on your door asking if they can please feature your historic C9 in their newish PC-only racing sim that has maybe a few hundred thousand people playing it (a fraction of the Forza audience). In this scenario Merc is the one in the position to make demands because having their car in this small, indie title is not likely to provide nearly as much return as a console game that's literally a household name, so they can afford to pass on this opportunity if it doesn't suit their desires. So they tell this small Italian indie developer "Yes, you can feature our C9 in your little PC game but we only want the Le Mans version featured and will not allow it to be adjusted in any way that doesn't jive with the Le Mans configuration". The little Italian dev doesn't have much clout in this scenario but they know having the C9 (in any configuration) will be a big boost for their up and coming game so they agree to the terms Merc has laid before them and players end up with a Le Mans only version that can't be tuned to have more downforce.

Obviously I'm guessing at some of that, but now you have a very likely scenario of how two racing game developers end up with two totally different licenses pertaining to the same car. As NateDog said, no two licenses are the same and each manufacturer will grant license agreements that will be of the most benefit to themselves. Forza likely provides far more benefit just due to the sheer number of sales and thus are likely able to make demands that smaller developers can't get away with.

I'm sorry but Yes, that sounds like total guesswork. I doubt Mercedes cares all that much about Forza either, as long as the car looks right. The idea that MB would somehow demand that every little nut and bolt be modeled in this-or-that manner, going over exact downforce figures and allowable wing settings - It sounds ridiculous.

And now you're saying that sometimes they demand that level of fidelity, and sometimes they don't. Who would check this? Is MB going to pay someone to sit there and play AC or Forza to make sure that, say, the left rear damper can be set to only its historically allowable settings?

 

[Brandon Wright]

I'm sorry but Yes, that sounds like total guesswork. I doubt Mercedes cares all that much about Forza either, as long as the car looks right. The idea that MB would somehow demand that every little nut and bolt be modeled in this-or-that manner, going over exact downforce figures and allowable wing settings - It sounds ridiculous.

And now you're saying that sometimes they demand that level of fidelity, and sometimes they don't. Who would check this? Is MB going to pay someone to sit there and play AC or Forza to make sure that, say, the left rear damper can be set to only its historically allowable settings?

I don't doubt for a second that Mercedes cares about that stuff or would demand every little nut and bolt be modeled right. Have you ever read anything about Mercedes? They are absolute sticklers for details and are protective of their image/product. When dealing with a giant like Forza it's in Mercedes benefit to play by Forza's rules in order to get their product/name in front of millions and millions of players, so they will make concessions. When dealing with a small dev like Kunos they get to play by their own rules, no concessions necessary. This is how the marketing world works.

I doubt they pay someone to check every AC update that comes out but they certainly signed off on the final version of the car before it made its way into the game and they have faith that if Kunos wants any more Mercedes models in AC that they will abide by the original terms of the licensing agreement. Sure, Kunos could try to sneak a change in there but if Merc found out about it they could terminate any existing/future contracts which would not benefit Kunos in any way, and if other manufacturers found out they didn't honor their Mercedes agreement they may think twice about doing any deals with Kunos. So there's zero reason for Kunos to try to sneak in some changes that weren't part of the original deal, and thusly no reason for Merc to pay someone to constantly check every AC build.

 

[kondor999]

No, they're not going to pay anyone to play a videogame to make sure the downforce settings the game designer chose are perfectly aligned with the real-life settings on an antique race car that Sauber built in 1989 (MB owns the rights to the car and supplied the engine, but Sauber was the actual constructor).

What they might conceivably care about is the car not looking right, or violating a ban on alcohol or tobacco sponsorship logos, or Kunos handing out the data to random modders who then claim their mod was Kunos Approved. Like you said, it's a big company. These are the sorts of things they care about.

What got KS worried is that MB might see an S1 version of the C9 on RD, see that it said Kunos Approved - and come back at them for more money.

KS is being properly cautious. Burrito's mod wasn't the problem. His claiming it was Kunos Approved, while using KS copyrighted, decrypted and repacked physics data was a big problem, because:
A) It wasn't approved.
B) It makes it look like Kunos is sublicensing the data they got from MB to random modders, for free. I am quite certain that KS isn't allowed to sub-license anything from the cars they have in the game - even if they give it away. Thus, we have the encrypted physics file.

So, like KS themselves said, they wanted to make sure anyone claiming "KS Approved" in the future triple-checks (their words) with them before claiming such a thing. Having dealt with plenty of lawyers in my life, I can't blame them at all.

 

[Glaurung]

 

[natedogg1867]

No, they're not going to pay anyone to play a videogame to make sure the downforce settings the game designer chose are perfectly aligned with the real-life settings on an antique race car that Sauber built in 1989 (MB owns the rights to the car and supplied the engine, but Sauber was the actual constructor).

I dont think you have a very comprehensive understanding of how licensing agreements work This is meant as no offense of course.

Every car that is released in AC (or other games where the content is licensed)... gets sent to the respective manufacturer before it releases to the public for approval. So yes, Merc, Porsche, BMW, Ford, etc all have teams that go over the content before it releases just for the explicit purpose of verifying that the content is as true of a representation to the actual product that the sim can faithfully represent.

It should be noted that this isnt always people directly from the manufacturer. Manu's commonly have 3rd party companies take care of all the licensing stuff. And these 3rd party companies are then the ones that Kunos, Sector3, Reiza, etc have to deal with to license a car. So these 3rd party companies are the ones giving approval and making sure that the cars are as faithful a representation as the license agreement calls for. And this is at the behest of the manufacturers for whose cars they license. This isnt always the case, but it happens often enough to mention.

So, if Kunos, Sector3, ISI, etc wanted to release a different version of the car, they would send it to the manufacturer for approval before releasing it, unless they want to damage their relationship with the company for doing 1) something against the license agreement 2) releasing a piece of content that the manufacturer doesnt want to be released.

Beyond that, I completely agree that it would have been nice to have the sprint version from the get-go. However, that is not what happened for reasons already stated numerous times.

And frankly, I think you may be a bit beyond help here when you have been told, in explicit terms twice now from 2 devs that work for Kunos (the main physics guy and the car content manager I believe) exactly why the sprint version isnt included.

So, for one final time...

The Mercedes C9 Sprint version is not included in Assetto Corsa due to:

1: being part of a licence limitation - which are understandably and traditionally undisclosed for mere players of the game - that somehow prevents developers from including any modifications of the original car for which they originally obtained the licence in the first place.

2: said developer upon gauging the sheer breadth of chaos, disruption and mayhem such misjudged omission could potentially cause in our beloved simracing community, literally affecting the lives of tens of people, decided to deliberately and purposefully leave out the aforementioned vehicle because THEY JUST WANT TO WATCH THE WORLD BURN!

And you can figure out which of those 2 is not the actual answer.

This thread has been going nowhere for a while now.

/thread

 

[Gergo Panker]

The second one?

There is no right answer, only one you can live with.

 

[Metla]

The best part of this thread is everyone just making up scenarios to back up their stated position which was only ever based on assumption and wishful thinking...

I blame the gypsies.

(Though I find it odd that someone doesnt gel with a specific car so they accuse the developer of putting the wrong car in the game)

 

[jmoyer]

(Though I find it odd that someone doesnt gel with a specific car so they accuse the developer of putting the wrong car in the game)

Finding it strange that AC has a couple LM-specific cars but not any version of the track isn't really related to not "gelling" with the car. Personally, there are enough cars currently in AC and coming in the next few years that I'm not overly bothered, but I also wouldn't mind seeing the C9 Sprint, 935/77, or 908/03 in the sim either. In the meantime when I feel like driving historic Monza or Silverstone I can always grab one of the cars that doesn't really work anywhere else.

 

[Andreas Knöpke]

The whole topic is bollocks.
Whoever wanted the Sprint version has it now or can get it from his friends.
So as long as the AC physics don't change much again the car will be fine

 

[kondor999]

Appreciate all the input from everyone. I think the C9 drives fine as-is under 1.11.3 on v10 tires.

 

[rdvisiter]

blah blah blah
wheres the mod that adds the non LM variant ?