Your opinion: More modern cars or more classic cars?

75% of cars on US roads are 16 or fewer years old. I don't know the percentage of post-04 cars in Beam, but I don't think it's anywhere near 75%.

 

burnside wouldn't work because it was established in 1953 in the lore

 

ops... sorry. thank u for the information

 

you dont have to be sorry its good

 

Welcome to the forums! Make sure you read the terms of service and forum rules carefully (you didn't do anything wrong).

 

A

As far as I know, the most common pre-WWII are Ford Model Ts and Ford Model As.

For example, there are more Model As for sale on Hemmings than all 30s Chevies.

 

i made only the luxury cars

 

It's actually been done years ago. - https/www.beamng.com/threads/which-vehicle-would-you-like-to-see-in-game-next.13058/


However, I'd actually prefer to have an elimination mechanism. Say, the devs making 8 concepts and holding several voting rounds until just one emerges at the top.

Something like the World Cup system:

 

I'm just gonna be frank, I'm getting real tired of seeing this "we need more modern than classic cars" or vice versa, it's been done to death and really does it matter? I know people still would love to see certain cars in the game, but every time I see this goddamn type of conversation it always ends up being a divide, which defeats the purpose when its just gonna become a loop of people justifying why we need to see more of "x" than of "y".

As for a voting system for upcoming cars... I don't really think that's at all efficient since not only does it remove the surprise element that we've been seeing in the last couple cars, but also because as much as I know the developers mind hearing out community feedback, a elimination system would probably be chaotic since it'll be obvious where the notable biases for certain car archetypes are gonna pop out and some of the interesting ones won't get attention because of that. On top of that, I'm pretty sure the way they do cars is far more easier on them because they don't have to go through the effort of basically making a competition just to see what car gets picked, it really isn't necessary or worth the time for them anymore and would just be more of a hassle on them if anything.

/rant.

 

We have 5 modern cars and 19 old cars but ok

 

dude's not arguing about whether we should get them or not
he's talking about why these threads keep popping up, and I agree, its a bit repetitive

 

Plus, the whole "I want more modern cars" gets redundant too, like it gets really old when the only shit you suggest for cars has the general of theme of being 2020 models and nothing more interesting than that. Besides, I've heard all the damn points from people who want modern cars more, but frankly just having more modern cars isn't interesting unless there's a nuance that's worth making it a official car, like with the Vivace we got months ago.

Oh, and I want to assure this for P_enta but I think we've heard you blabber enough times about wanting a 2020 car, its not interesting to hear it more than twice.

 

ironically I enjoy Driving modern cars in game the most

 

I think "quirky" cars are alot better for this game, since they will always bring some sort of new feature that we haven't seen before, like the tograc's adaptive dampers. I hope for cars that would bring more variety and features to the game that can later be applied to other cars, or retro-fitted by modders.

 

this. exactly this.
whether it's a funky modern super adaptive suspension system, or a super complex hydropneumatic suspension system from the 50's, or a bouncy old transverse leaf setup from the 20's,
or alternatively a full HTML based gauge cluster UI on a simulated screen, or a cheesy faux vector-graphics-looking 7-segment LCD cluster,
as long as it's something which we haven't seen before, i'm happy.

 

on that topic, a hybrid system would be neat, and would open the door to modding by a lot

 

The game was doing fine without it for years, and I'll wager that it helped increase the hype. Now we don't know what's gonna happen, and we're kinda walking in the dark.

You mean that players' preferences will be accounted for?

I doubt the time needed to write down a few car archetypes and make sketches of them (e.g. mid-00s US minivan) is remotely comparable to how long it takes to develop even a single vehicle.

 

I think annoyingdude's idea is good, but i should specify something: once a car is voted out, that does not mean it is cancelled altogether, rather it is pushed down on the priority list.
as some people have mentioned before as well, instead of saying:
"here's a cherrier ommelette, which will have FWD and inline engines, here's a jargl squit, it's a RR rally monster, here's a burnside bacchus, yet another landbarge having an identity crisis"
you just hint at particular archetypes:
"a 50's british luxury car, a 1920s people's car, a 2000s luxury SUV", etc.
That way the devs still have the freedom to make changes as they go through the development.

 

Considering how long its taken them to get ALL of the pre-planned cars from years ago done, and that the Wendover has still yet to get completed, I'd completely disagree because it doesn't help when we see something we would want, and its still stuck in development hell (hence why people were so feisty over the Bluebuck before).

Well the majority vote I will bet is gonna be for only 2-3 archetypes, and they're gonna be the obviously most frequently asked. Ones like a vintage car will clearly be picked more over, say, a 70s American subcompact. It made sense back then to do a voting system because they weren't sure exactly what order they wanted to depict their archetypes in and did atleast once have the community pick the next car. Nowadays they probably have more than enough on the backburner at the moment, and the community is far more bloated (and frankly far more messy than ever).

But why go through the effort of setting all of this up and taking days or even weeks until they get results, when they can literally just write down ideas from what they see in the forums, detail the concept, and eventually start the project when they feel like it? They probably have plenty of concepts and archetypes we don't even know in the back of their hand or planned later (and no, not the concept list since that has been confirmed to be irrelevant).

TL;DR: Having a voting system now will only really lead to a mass frenzy of people jumping to a few archetypes and the others, possibly more interesting, are left to the wayside, and I really don't believe the developers should go through all this effort just to get one result, when breezing through the forums to find what common archetype are found in the community would take far less time on their side and not a whole lot required to go into it. Oh, and as I said, they probably already have a couple archetypes and concepts we haven't seen revealed yet, so we can't assume they're just devoid of them.

 

And what is bad about the community getting what they want?

And this means they need some sort of sorting method - and a poll is a good idea for one.

I doubt that a few weeks are going to matter much, especially since a poll can run simultaneously with the earlier development.

How do you objectively determine what is more interesting in the context of Beam, and what isn't?
--- Post updated ---

I do agree it'd be good for, say, 2nd, 3rd and 4th place finalists to be used in the next rounds.