Assetto Corsa EVO Early Access Discussion Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Famine
  • 1,249 comments
  • 253,417 views
lancia delta hf
I have a few hobbies. One thing I've noticed in every hobby is that there are two type of people: those that are into th3e hobby, and those who's hobby is the equipment of the hobby. Photography is a great example, instead of taking photos many just constantly look to the next best lens or body and drool over the specs or pixel peep. Same in the watch hobby, many fornicate over the specs, I blame YouTube reviews from this craze.

Lets say they kept the economy in, and it was total crap, then what? As much as I was looking forward to it I kept wondering, how is it actually going to work. So I deliver a Tiramisu, it costs €7 , I take how much, €1.25, €2 for my pay? So I only have to do that another 1000 times to buy a wing? What high paying jobs could there have been? Other than perhaps being a break down rescue driver, which then needs a truck. How would this system work with people who have no interest in freeroam and only want to race circuits? Create 2 different career modes, With a small team?

For me what I'm really interested in is driving roads as much as a good career mode. I like racing but I like driving too, and driving on race tracks is crap. Me and my mates use to race on Eiger in GT most nights, but before race we'd cruise around the track and just race sections until one of us lagged behind. Essentially just like casual street racing, so career mode no matter how good would be redundant when my mates are online as we will just street race on free roam. I still hope they have a good replacement for their original plan though..
Click to expand...
Yes i Watch the interviews with Marco and he explain why they dropped economy, it was slowing down devolpment, and there was issues going around with mod support free roam etc, but after seing the modding tools i can still see some modders work on it eventully.
 
After hearing Marco, and thinking more about the subject, I really think the removal of the economy wasn't the right choice, it was the only choice.

Kunos made a mistake a small studio, like them, can't do: try to get everyone's attention. It lead to a scope too large for what they could handle, and the results are visible to everyone.

As already established, the greatest threat to ACEvo's success, is the original AC. If Evo is to have a chance at thriving, it must render the original redundant. What made the original AC explode into what it is today, was not a extensive career mode, but the fact that it was a highly moddable sandbox. If you didn't like it the way it was, and you had the knowledge/tools, you could turn it into the game you wanted, then share that work with others looking for similar experiences.

It looks to me that Kunos realized that Evo has a better chance if it's a stronger foundation to be built upon, instead of a building that can be somewhat decorated. Unfortunately, a career mode with XP, credits, especially one with connections to multiplayer progression, is incompatible with the kind of moddability expected from AC. Modders would start taking that progression system apart, giving an unfair advantage over anyone trying to do things the "normal" way.
 
Last edited:
warp9engage
After hearing Marco, and thinking more about the subject, I really think the removal of the economy wasn't the right choice, it was the only choice.

Kunos made a mistake a small studio, like them, can't do: try to get everyone's attention. It lead to a scope too large for what they could handle, and the results are visible to everyone.

As already established, the greatest threat to ACEvo's success, is the original AC. If Evo is to have a chance at thriving, it must render the original redundant. What made the original AC explode into what it is today, was not a extensive career mode, but the fact that it was a highly moddable sandbox. If you didn't like it the way it was, and you had the knowledge/tools, you could turn it into the game you wanted, then share that work with others looking for similar experiences.

It looks to me that Kunos realized that Evo has a better chance if it's a stronger foundation to be built upon, instead of a building that can be somewhat decorated. Unfortunately, a career mode with XP, credits, especially one with connections to multiplayer progression, is incompatible with the kind of moddability expected from AC. Modders would start taking that progression system apart, giving an unfair advantage over anyone trying to do things the "normal" way.
Click to expand...
I'm still excited for it. Having said that for single players it doesn't matter how good career is if the AI is crap, with amazing AI you can at least get away with a crap career if you can create your own championships.
 
sirjim73
You could ALWAYS access the content you wanted.

There wasn't going to be any NEED to grind.

That's why there was Open Mode as well as Career. You could have completely ignored the Career mode and played the game exactly as you like it... that was the whole point of the previous gameplay setup.

You could play the game how you like it (Open Mode). I could play the game how I like it (Career). Everyone happy.
Click to expand...
Fair point. I probably didn't frame my response properly. I'm happy for them to ditch career mode if it means the base product is better.

E.g. if Kunos are time and resources constrained (which all developers are), I would prefer that the time, cost and effort be put into making the driving experience and AI better, rather than focusing on career mode.

But don't get me wrong, I can see why a lot of people are disappointed.
 
New question: How do I get Simhub to work in AC Evo? AC Evo isn't listed in SH's game selection! It's not really fun without my Next Level Haptic Mat!
 
xedos6
New question: How do I get Simhub to work in AC Evo? AC Evo isn't listed in SH's game selection! It's not really fun without my Next Level Haptic Mat!
Click to expand...
Are you on the latest version of simhub? From my understanding, it's been supported since 9.7
 

Attachments

  • Simhub ACEvo.webp
    Simhub ACEvo.webp
    61.1 KB · Views: 5
CarreraGT
I still don't get it. Are you suggesting it's not called a 288 GTO?
Click to expand...
Not suggesting, no. That car is, and always was, called the Ferrari GTO.

The later addition of numbers was an unofficial invention to apparently avoid confusion with the 20-year older 250 GTO (these people would melt when faced with FIAT 500s), and while recognised by Ferrari it has never adopted it.

The booklets in my post is the full Ferrari GTO owner's handbook, for reference.
 
Famine
Not suggesting, no. That car is, and always was, called the Ferrari GTO.

The later addition of numbers was an unofficial invention to apparently avoid confusion with the 20-year older 250 GTO (these people would melt when faced with FIAT 500s), and while recognised by Ferrari it has never adopted it.

The booklets in my post is the full Ferrari GTO owner's handbook, for reference.
Click to expand...
You're splitting hairs mate. It's a 288 GTO
 
CarreraGT
You're splitting hairs mate. It's a 288 GTO.
Click to expand...
No, there's no such thing.

It's a Ferrari GTO. That's quite literally what Ferrari called, and calls, it, what the badging says, what the brochures said, and what the owner's handbook says. It's not "splitting hairs" to call the car what it's actually called rather than a nickname.

I'd expect a racing game developer made of Italian car enthusiasts to know that, and not make the same mistakes that others do, which is exactly what my original point was.
 
Famine
No, there's no such thing.

It's a Ferrari GTO. That's quite literally what Ferrari called, and calls, it, what the badging says, what the brochures said, and what the owner's handbook says. It's not "splitting hairs" to call the car what it's actually called rather than a nickname.

I'd expect a racing game developer made of Italian car enthusiasts to know that, and not make the same mistakes that others do, which is exactly what my original point was.
Click to expand...
I mean, that's a bit like saying the Dino wasn't a Ferrari, but I get your point
 
Ultimately, who cares whether officially it's known as a Ferrari GTO or unofficially as a Ferrari 288 GTO? If many people have adopted the "288" moniker, big deal.
Bit like how everyone adopted the "Yellowbird" name to the Ruf CTR.
 
CarreraGT
Sure. Who built it then?
Click to expand...
Is this the Tata Evoque then?
IMG_2379.webp



Ryan81
Ultimately, who cares
Click to expand...
Motor enthusiasts care
Ryan81
whether officially it's known as a Ferrari GTO or unofficially as a Ferrari 288 GTO? If many people have adopted the "288" moniker, big deal.
Bit like how everyone adopted the "Yellowbird" name to the Ruf CTR.
Click to expand...
Ok but it’s a RUF CTR, where does it say YELLOWBIRD on it?
 
CTRL Garage
Is this the Tata Evoque then?
View attachment 1523883



Motor enthusiasts care

Ok but it’s a RUF CTR, where does it say YELLOWBIRD on it?
Click to expand...
That's exactly my point. The GTO doesn't have "288" emblazoned on the bodywork, nor does "Yellowbird" appear on the bodywork of the CTR, yet so many people have adopted the name. Are you saying people who use/say 288 and/or Yellowbird or not motoring enthusiasts?

Land Rover being owned by Tata isn't really the same analogy. You could make the same claim for the F-Type. Why not call it a Tata F-Type?
 
Unlike how Ferrari never adopted the 288 name, RUF do refer to their own car as the Yellowbird.
www.rufautomobile.co.uk

RUF CTR YELLOWBIRD

The CTR Yellowbird - One of the most influential cars ever produced.
www.rufautomobile.co.uk www.rufautomobile.co.uk

Ryan81
. Are you saying people who use/say 288 and/or Yellowbird or not motoring enthusiasts?
Click to expand...
No, what's being said is that an Italian game developer with a passion for cars and clear eye for detail, should be calling it by it's correct name.
 
MagpieRacer
Unlike how Ferrari never adopted the 288 name, RUF do refer to their own car as the Yellowbird.
www.rufautomobile.co.uk

RUF CTR YELLOWBIRD

The CTR Yellowbird - One of the most influential cars ever produced.
www.rufautomobile.co.uk www.rufautomobile.co.uk


No, what's being said is that an Italian game developer with a passion for cars and clear eye for detail, should be calling it by it's correct name.
Click to expand...
So because Ferrari themselves never adopted 288 whereas Ruf took the name Yellowbird and made it part of Ruf history, somehow that legitimizes the use of it?

Does anyone know for sure whether Kunos used 288 by accident or deliberately? Perhaps they like the unofficial name better rather than it being on oversight on their part?
 

Latest Posts

Back