It was the push I needed for the game to be honest.Īs long as the physics are on par or a bit lower/higher than DR2.0 I'm ok with it. As much as I love the Spain stage the cars handle weird.Īppreciate all the replies. Oh yeah, tarmac is really weird in dr2.0. Originally posted by 6nop:I am working on first impressions, but it seems on the physics department it depends. Though, if your willing to forgo online events in WRC, why not get DR2.0 and WRC9 from the discount bin? The cars in WRC10 are modelled slightly better than WRC9, but it's not night and day. If you like the classics (as most rally fans do, myself inclusive), DR2.0 is your beast. So if you want to play with modern WRC cars (WRC, WRC2 J-WRC), WRC10 is probably a decent experience. Famously, its engine is forward of the front axle, and is supposed to be a tricky car to drive (with a tendency to under-steer). Similarly, the Quattro didn't have much character. Classic RWD cards seem to be modelled better in DR2.0. The Alpine had no RWD characteristics (power over-steer) even on slippery surfaces. DR2.0's physics on Tarmac is really weird, particularly in the wet.Īs for Non-WRC classes, so far I have only driven the Alpine and Quattro (pre-Group B). ![]() Generally though Tarmac in WRC10 is a better experience than DR2.0. ![]() Wet tarmac is a particular odd-ball in WRC10, as I couldn't feel a whole lot of difference to the dry except for rain effects on the windshield. ![]() The cars feel heavier when DR2.0, but perhaps have too much grip. I am working on first impressions, but it seems on the physics department it depends.įrom what I have seen so far, the WRC classes seem to be modelled well.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |