Update Speculation thread

Game is set in 2020 yet there are 3 cars from 2020 and 6 form 2009-2020. I think I don't need say anything more.

 

I don't see how the current IRL year justifies us having uneven representation of cars in game.

We have no German or French or Japanese maps, should those countries be under represented in the vehicle roster too?

 

There is the ETK Driver Experience Center, so we do have one small German map.

 

*No proper maps in which a significant gameplay setting is possible in their current form

 

Game is set in 2020 or at least this is "final" year.
1. There are no single car that have year production greater than 2020. Best example - Cherrier 2020-2020.
2. Validation stickers on Californian licence plate. In USA they give you sticker for few years if I remember correctly. Right now I seen stickers with 2020, 2021 and 2022.

Like someone mentioned before - ETK Driving Experience map still counts. European cars have European map - Italy.

About French map you probably think about gendarmerie skin for Sunburst. That actually was created to memorize Paris attacks in 2015.

I will agree with Japanese map... kinda. So far we have 2 RHD cars. One old (can be used for vintage or banger racing) and one "joke car". Still majority of cars are made for American market.

So yeah, I will stay with my statement - we need more modern cars rather than older ones, for now at least.

 

This game takes place in 2021, they just haven't updated the descriptions for the Cherrier FCV and also haven't updated the license plates. The game definitely takes place in 2021 because, well, 2021 is the current year. That's like saying that when they started development and only had the D series, Covet, and GM, the game takes place in 1997 because that's when the newest car came out.

There are no vehicles in this game that are, as you say, "joke cars". This is a serious simulation game, there is no reason why they would make a so-called "joke car". (What car do you even think is a joke car?)

I don't think we need any modern cars, we already have 5 cars spanning the past decade (2011-2021), while there are only 6 cars spanning the two oldest decades (1953-1973).

 

You have a point about having a few cars spanning this past decade, there's not much, or anything really, in terms of mid 2000s cars. The Roamer facelift is the only one goes up to 2005 and then there's a 4 year gap to the Sunburst. So here's how I see it:

Pre 50s: Needed; completely empty besides mods.

50s to 70s: Could use more but not anytime soon in order to keep some balance

80s and 90s: Not much more needed except for maybe stuff such as a Covet coupe/sedan or Pessima coupe and (both of which can be done in revamps rather than major releases)

mid 2000s: Needed; rather baron with only 2 vehicles that hardly count (D-Series and Roamer facelifts)

2010-2020s: Game would be fine without another vehicle in this range for at least another couple of years

I personally think they should go for a mid 2000s vehicle in the next update (considering we just got an older one) and then cycle back to pre 50s to keep that new -> old -> new -> old pattern going

 

This doesn't address what I said at all. I'm not denying that the game takes place in 2020, I'm denying that the setting of the game justifies having uneven representation of the roster.

The game's setting based on current maps is Italy and USA in present day. Being that the ETK test center is just a test center for the driver school campaign and Automation map is just for the collab, I'm not counting those as gameplay settings. By the logic of "the roster should follow the setting of the game" we would only have modern USA and Italian cars. Nothing (or at least an under-representation of) pre-2000 or Japanese/German/French/British/Australian/Soviet/Sweedish/Canadian vehicles by that logic.

This is a vehicle sim, it ought to have a reasonably even representation of vehicles. Part of being a well rounded car sim is a well rounded car roster.

 

While I do agree with most of this, how do the D series and Roamer hardly count? Just because they started production earlier than the year 2000 doesn't mean they count any less than a 2000's car than a vehicle that started production between 2000 and 2009.

Also, I doubt the developers will keep a new > old > new > old pattern much longer because they don't want to oversaturate the game with modern cars while there are still plenty of older categories that haven't been filled.

 

I struggle to understand how you can assume a game that is currently just a sandbox/simulator can be set in any specific year. I would wait until Career mode comes out before making such bold assumptions...

 

I meant that they don't really count because they're just facelifts, not independent vehicles.

 

This isn't Forza. This is a free roam simulator.

 

The answer is simple. That time defines that uneven numbers of cars for that year UNLESS game have specified events. Just like IRL you won't see many cars from 70s UNLESS there is specified event like car show, vintage race, banger etc.

So yes, for now it's logical that game should have even numbers of cars in each decade. Game still don't have story, it's just a sandbox. The best scenario will be when each vehicle will have it's own competitor (eg. LeGran vs Wendover, Pessima vs ETK I-series etc).

However it would take also decades to make car list even on whole timeline if we count everything from 1950 to 2020. That why many games have uneven number of older cars OR modern cars (if there is a story that take place mostly in the past). Of course there are games that trying keep it even, but let's face it. I would love to see that but I don't think there is enough workforce to accomplish this (with full respect to the devs, don't be mad).

 

i know

 

Its good for career mode, but not at all for freeroam.

 

yeah
especially since you could just freecam and teleport to it

 

So you're saying we need to focus on cars for the gameplay setting that make sense in IRL driving? Because that leaves us with a roster of 2000-2020 American and Italian commuter cars, commercial vehicles, and municipal vehicles. This is sounding like an incredibly boring hypothetical vehicle roster.

BeamNG is a car game, not limited to present day daily driving. Videogame devs of every studio need to consider the sort of game they are going for when they pick the roster (at least for games with smaller rosters, so Forza Horizon and GTA V aside). NFS Hot Pursuit games are nearly completely limited to modern and modern-classic high end performance cars because that's what they are going for. Wreckfest has a roster limited to classic and modern classic cars because that's what they are going for. So again, if we want a well-rounded game, we need a well-rounded roster.

 

The distribution of vehicles within the game's roster shouldn't be completely even. Comparing the broad appeal and career-mode applicability of different vehicle archetypes, some are clearly more applicable and appealing than others.

 

"Even to a reasonable degree" was implied. Of course it's of no use to follow "even distribution" to a draconian extent, especially since this game is always going to have a small roster and therefore sample size compared to some other games in the genre. I certainly don't expect a perfect representation of the real world automotive sample as cars like the Dale would be rather stupid to have represented (although thinking about the idea of the Dymaxion car in BeamNG is certainly funny)

 

So... anyone noticed the additional "non-Overdrive" Drive position in the Wendover's floor/console shifter?
Don't mind me, no time to go through the last 50 pages.

Implementation of OD-off is, personally at least, the most overdue of the remaining "missing" capabilities that the more basic, but electronics fitted, automatics should feature.

The issue would be that the rest still use a D21 shift pattern, and a separate OD toggle switch would realistically require another control binding or some funny code to make it work with the simple up/down gear select controls.

On this topic, spoiler box for those interested:

Spoiler

To share a bit, "basic" electronic logic autos, or the really old purely mechanical type, always try to "short" upshift the moment the gas pedal is released if the resulting RPM (assuming correct calibration) is sufficiently above idle, a mechanically sympathetic driver uses these "lower than normal D" positions to prevent this constant up-down shifting when throttle input is varied. Preventing gear hunting, in other words. Towing on hilly roads is a common usage example given in owner manuals.

The 2 position in purely mechanical autos, sometimes shown as D in 2 speed models, almost always means skipping 1st and forcing to 2nd. Sufficient reduction for commuting about in the 2nd ratio would be achieved purely from the torque converter, but a keen driver can "manually" use the 1 position to win the stoplight drags, in a sense it's unrestricted manu-sequential style shifting but with a mechanically inefficient anti-stall fluid coupling. Have personally set up the 2 speed Bluebuck and Miramar to behave this way based on their close IRL analogues.

Many modern autos can be forced to start from a standstill in the 2nd ratio using the sequential mode, though somewhat less important today with properly tuned TCS. Certain models bypass the 1st ratio by default too, like powerful V12 models, and most implementations of the infamous transverse ZF 9 speed.

Back with these old mechanical autos, assuming engagement of the "appropriate" bands/clutches, shift to a lower position while at max RPM in the highest ratio and some metal bits can probably score a job offer for the Boring company or SpaceX.

Electronic controls and sensors thus brought us safeties and sometimes configurable behaviour.

Shifting to 2 or L or trying to disengage OD at max RPM in top gear would only preselect the lower gear ratio, only actually down shifting when a safe RPM limit is met. This could still cause a somewhat destabilizing jump in RPM, especially without engine drag torque control or rev-matching. Engine braking in the, say, 2nd ratio can be different between D and 2 depending on the specific implementation of the bands/clutches. (Old service/repair manuals can be goldmines of info)

Most of the pre-00's but electronics fitted Japanese autos only had "limit to" behaviour, even some of the 6 speed Toyota autos of the past 10 years still behave this way in their sequential-esque mode. For example, the S position sets it to S4 by default and disables the (barely) adaptive aggression logic, the car would short shift up to the 4th ratio when the minimal possible RPM is reached and minimal gas pedalling is applied. The behaviour is actually quite similar to the D432L positions used in some of their preceding 5 speeds, just using a compact + and - selector instead of multiple distinct positions.

Some 4-speed Mazdas had an alt mode switch, similar to some Germans, to toggle between (default) "limit to" and a pseudo "force to" mode that skipped certain high or low ratios depending which of the D2L positions was chosen. Complaints about complexity and the introduction of TCS resulted in a gradual reversion to a simple OD-off toggle that only affected the D position by the time of their first 5 speeds, though they soon switched entirely to a sequential mode.

Honda integrated both modes into the regular shift pattern for their 4 speeds, distinguishing them by printing a D in front of the limit modes: available forward drive positions could be D4, D3 (OD-off), and then 2, which forces to the 2nd ratio.

I believe that some of the electronically controlled Ford 4 speeds have unique behaviour for the 2 position too: Low to moderate throttle means force to 2, but flooring it from a standstill can make it start in the 1st ratio.