Dreamcast Racing Games Article - Tell us what you think!

[Ghegs]

I'm not sure if V-Rally can be counted as a "true" Test Drive game, since originally the game had nothing to do with the Test Drive name, only the North American Dreamcast release was branded as such, just like the North American PS1 release got stuck with the Need for Speed prefix. Elsewhere the game was simply V-Rally 2.

I've got Test Drive V-Rally, and it's nowhere near as arcade-y as Sega Rally 2. Very much more sim-based. The cars also appeared crushed and boxed in like cubes. But it has lots more courses and you can design your own.

The world could certainly use a few more arcade-style rally racers. Not enough of those around.

[Valkyrie-Favor]

OP, you've covered the good Dreamcast racing games I know. But your descriptions are kind of confusing: what is meant by 'mechanical knowledge required?' Is that the same as 'learning curve' or something? It might also be useful to list which games have been completely supplanted by modern games and which are still unique or really good by comparison.

About the n64/Dreamcast thing, I think it doesn't add much to the article and it creates the impression you don't know/don't like racers on other platforms. Ignoring the PS2 and especially PC racers, which are the most advanced, looks problematic and it's beyond the scope of this article anyway.

Also, there are some capitalization errors in the beginning.

Overall it's a decent list. I think I'll go play Sega Rally now. Keep it up.

[Valkyrie-Favor]

This is always an area of misconception because different games are programmed to use a different amount of the stick's play area. The Dreamcast analog stick is actually extremely delicate with no dead zones unless you've worn out your controller. That's why Daytona USA 2001 throws people for a loop. It uses the entire analog stick whereas most racing games did not. You tend to think you have delicate fingers until you play a game that's not holding your hand.
I

I bow to you sir, I am a humble Shmup/Fighter/RPG gamer and a lot of that was Greek to me. To be honest, I never change those settings, I always just try to adapt to the default ones, so that was really informative. It would be great if you could incorporate it into the article. I'm also a Luddite who refuses to pay for download only games, so I can't speak about those versions, but I've never gotten why people think Daytona is so hard on the DC and your assessment seems spot on to me.

It's simple enough to break down. Analog sticks can be manipulated whereas digital cannot. You press forward a certain amount and the character moves in reaction to how far you pressed. Super Mario 64 at the time was revolutionary for this. The analog stick allowed you to tap the stick to make Mario tiptoe or press it all the way forward to make Mario run. Super Mario Brothers on the NES on the other hand only had digital. You could move right but it was either "on" or it was "off." The only way to make Mario run was to hold an additional run button.

The amount of play on the stick is just how far you have to press until it actually reacts to you. A lot of racing games only used, say, 80% of the stick so that it wouldn't feel jerky to players who didn't have delicate fingers. So if you only tapped the stick lightly, the car wouldn't move very much even if you were going very fast. It'd be like playing Mario 64 and just slightly tapping the stick to sneak past a sleeping Piranha Plant, and realizing Mario's not moving at all because the innermost area of the stick is "dead."

It's just a way that game developers compensate for the fact that people aren't very gentle with their controllers. Sega wanted to give you a real sense of feedback with Daytona. In a real race if you just slightly jerked the steering wheel while moving at 100 miles per hour, even that would cause a significant response. You're moving at 100mph and the wheels just turned. You just redirected a massive amount of kinetic energy by turning your front wheels just barely.

By the way, elaborating on that point and the control options available could be helpful for anyone who wants to get in
to these games.

[wryguy87]

OP, you've covered the good Dreamcast racing games I know. But your descriptions are kind of confusing: what is meant by 'mechanical knowledge required?' Is that the same as 'learning curve' or something? It might also be useful to list which games have been completely supplanted by modern games and which are still unique or really good by comparison.

About the n64/Dreamcast thing, I think it doesn't add much to the article and it creates the impression you don't know/don't like racers on other platforms. Ignoring the PS2 and especially PC racers, which are the most advanced, looks problematic and it's beyond the scope of this article anyway.

Also, there are some capitalization errors in the beginning.

Overall it's a decent list. I think I'll go play Sega Rally now. Keep it up.

Mechanical knowledge is basically how much knowledge you personally need to have about cars. It has nothing to do with learning curve because the games don't teach you anything about it. Only Tokyo Xtreme Racer holds your hand and tells you what your car settings will change.

Sega Rally is average because you can adjust your car's suspension settings and such but it's very simplified. If you know absolutely nothing about cars though, it's still intimidating to mess with something like your transmission gear ratios.

Hydro Thunder requires absolutely no understanding of the real world in any way. Daytona on the other hand requires a very basic understanding of rear wheel drive physics, but due to its general lack of realism most people can still pick it up so long as they understand the basic concept of powerslides.

F355 Challenge requires a genuine high-end knowledge of car mechanics and physics. It is impossible to play it like you would another racing game because you must understand the concept of weight distribution, considering those are mid engine cars.

I believe I've covered enough about which games are still relevant and which aren't in the entries themselves. The grand majority of the games I covered on this list are still relevant and are either the best on their series or don't have modern day equivalents.

[bacardipr05]

Might be going on a limb of whats considered a racing game but im throw this one out. Hows about Trickstyle?

[Valkyrie-Favor]

Mechanical knowledge is basically how much knowledge you personally need to have about cars.

All right, that's pretty cool. I think it's important that you say that in the article though, I had no idea what it meant until you explained it. "Car control complexity" might be a better way to phrase it. But how is it different from "driving technique" then? It sounds like the same thing to me. The skill factor you mention in the Daytona section provides some hints about what you mean...is that a judgement of the game's difficulty?

I really don't like chasing after words, but the article would be improved if no one had to guess at your meaning.

[Crynox]

This is always an area of misconception because different games are programmed to use a different amount of the stick's play area. The Dreamcast analog stick is actually extremely delicate with no dead zones unless you've worn out your controller. That's why Daytona USA 2001 throws people for a loop. It uses the entire analog stick whereas most racing games did not. You tend to think you have delicate fingers until you play a game that's not holding your hand.

I arranged these games in order of difficulty and there's a reason Daytona's near the top. Something that all the Sega made racing games have on this list (Daytona, Sega Rally, F355 and I think Sega GT) is that you can adjust the analog dead zone yourself (it's called "play" on the menu options. Some people use it to describe the condition of auto parts as well, such as a turbocharger that has "little to no play" in its shaft. The word "play" essentially means wiggle room.)

To achieve the same play sensitivity as the Xbox 360 or PS3 version of Daytona USA, it's about 3 notches down for the dead zone and 2 notches down for sensitivity. Though that's off the top of my head. I personally play Daytona 2001 with 1 notch down on the dead zone and full sensitivity.

I've played both the downloadable version and Dreamcast version to death, and you can get near identical control out of them. The problem is that when people complain about Daytona's settings on the Dreamcast, they just try to jerk "sensitivity" to its lowest setting and complain that it's still "too sensitive" because lightly tapping the analog stick will still do something.

Would just like to say thanks for making an impossible game playable for me. I played with the controller settings until I was comfortable. I have played Daytona through to completion now and I must say that I loved every minute of it. The difficulty was spot on, I had to practice on time trial to win the King of Daytona cup!

I liked the colourful graphics and the music is etched into my brain, (on constant reply).

Cheers buddy

[wryguy87]

Would just like to say thanks for making an impossible game playable for me. I played with the controller settings until I was comfortable. I have played Daytona through to completion now and I must say that I loved every minute of it. The difficulty was spot on, I had to practice on time trial to win the King of Daytona cup!

I liked the colourful graphics and the music is etched into my brain, (on constant reply).

Cheers buddy

That's great to hear. It's my personal candidate for best Dreamcast racer. It's too bad it's so misunderstood.

Mechanical knowledge is basically how much knowledge you personally need to have about cars.

All right, that's pretty cool. I think it's important that you say that in the article though, I had no idea what it meant until you explained it. "Car control complexity" might be a better way to phrase it. But how is it different from "driving technique" then? It sounds like the same thing to me. The skill factor you mention in the Daytona section provides some hints about what you mean...is that a judgement of the game's difficulty?

I really don't like chasing after words, but the article would be improved if no one had to guess at your meaning.

I'll probably simplify it to "Technical Knowledge" and "Difficulty." That's probably more understandable.

I'm in the middle of getting settled in to a new job so I haven't had time to really invest into finishing the article. At the moment I'm commuting a lot and probably won't have my free time returned to me until I move into the Silicon Valley in the near future.

[wryguy87]

Well, in addition to settling in to that new job, I also came across medical complications a 27 year old should never have to deal with.

This year has been a complicated one. I've got my Dreamcast hooked back up and should have the time and money to start researching the racing game library again.

I've put a lot of time in to finally beating Hydro Thunder to completion and I'm getting gradually better at Ferrari F355 Challenge.

I'll be revising their entries shortly to reflect my deeper knowledge of them.

[Atari5200fanatic]

I have to disagree about Daytona. The game should have handled well right out of the box. The new player shouldn't have to fiddle with sensitivity controls. Once you get good, then go fiddle with it. I was very disappointed -- if it handled like the Saturn version, that would have been terrific.