Home | Wiki | Live Chat | Dev Stream | YouTube | Archived Forums | Contact

[CSR69]: A sports car for a French guy


Actually, my car did meet minimums when I entered it, but I think the update changed some stats, and therefore, changed my entries stats. I wouldn’t enter a car I knew fell bellow the requirements.


Fair enough. That may well be the case, I’ve had that happen in other competitions too. But he went out to point it out here, without regard to any updates or other such possibilities. Poor form all around on that… if you did design yours with 30+ and the update broke it, he called you out for no reason… and he also advertised that the “sub par” model made it through to round 2.

(Was there actually an update between submissions opening and him judging round 1? I do not recall one…)


What? Maybe by US companies… but for the rest of the world, the 90’s were awesome.

From Japan: MR2, Supra, Celica, MX5, RX7, Familia GTR, 200SX/Silvia, 300ZX, Skyline, Pulsar GTiR, March SuperTurbo, Lancer Evo, Galant VR4, RVR, 3000GT/GTO, Eclipse, WRX, Legacy/Liberty GT, SVX, Integra & Civic Type R, NSX, Swift GTi…

From Europe: M3, Z3, 205 GTi, Golf GTi & VR6, Corrado, Elise, Elan, Boxter, Fiat Coupe Turbo, 850 T5R, Audi Quattro, S2, Alpine A610, Alfa Spider & GTV…


OK, so apparently in the post you were taking offense to, I forgot to say “except exotics”. Exotics are always an exception because they are nearly universally gorgeous, but also nearly universally unattainable to the average buyer, which this fellow seems to be.

So nix the exotics from your list.

Also funny how you have a large number of cars in there that would likely be well beyond this particular customer’s budget, compensating for inflation. Z3? M3? Supra? Hell, even the MR2 was no longer a cheap thrill by then.

The rest? Well, with the exception of the MX-5, they’re just souped up family/commuter cars.

My point is that his aesthetic demands seem to be incongruent with his budget and the time period.

FYI, with the exception of the Italian and French cars, Pulsar, and Skyline, we had all of those in one flavor or another. Especially ITR’s. So goddamned many ITRs. They didn’t turn anyone’s head unless they were EXTREMELY modified.

I also cannot stress enough: we’re not talking about mechanicals here. We’re talking about looks.


You might be right. Euro and Jap brands saw an explosion of performance cars in the 90s, many of which we could never imagine being built today.


I specifically excluded exotics - none of those on the list are exotic (except NSX and the Alpine).

But interesting you chose the MR2. In 1995 the US RRP was about $24k - about $40k in today’s dollars… I’d say that is pretty cheap for what it is/was.

Anyway, I think I actually agree with the core of what you are saying. There were plenty of cars in the 90s that were affordable but sporty and nice looking, but next to none that were affordable and supercar looking. People are building and designing NSX/Ferrari styled cars that end up really cheap because of the way the game is made, which makes is difficult for anyone who is trying to make a car that is closer to being realistic for the market and time period. Is that accurate?


Yeah, I’d say so


Well, when I see all your contestations I see that I was not prepared enough for this round. Keep in mind that is my first competion hosting, and writing something understandable takes lot of time for me because my english isn’t correct so I waste so much time to check grammar and all… And a I also try to give a reason why I bin a car and also try to give an advice.
There is 30+ entries, the 1st round was about to bin cars with a big issue of aesthetic and/or technical design. It already took me so much time for me to write it as I said, it was more simple and logic for me to judge driving criterias at the driving session, in the second round. I try my best to judge it, I ask for help on discord to try to do it well…
I hope you can understand this.

I’m sorry, I hope the next round will be better and I won’t host any CSR anymore.

I write the final in 2hours when I’m back home.


Man. Don’t worry.

You are doing that pretty well to be the first time.


VMO, do you mean to say meh or men? Because if it’s the latter you need to explain what the heck you mean! It doesn’t translate into english at all… :thinking:

Just relax, Masterdoggo, you’re doing fine. I, for one, would be happy for you to host another CSR. You’re not the worst host we’ve had by any stretch of the imagination and you’ve had three (!!!) forum shutdowns to deal with! So just do what ya gotta do and we’ll have our results when you’re ready… :grin:


Sorry MasterDoggo - my posts were never meant to reflect badly on your hosting or judging. The complaining was more to do with the difficulty in trying to make (winning) cars that are realistic and not perfect & of course the position that this puts the host/judge in. It’s also hard when you have to cut down from such a large entry pool, I understand you don’t have enough time to judge each one thoroughly.

I’ll back your decision in cutting my entry at least - it definitely wasn’t close to the best :slight_smile:


I can guarantee you VMO means “man”, but uses the plural because I don’t know, Google translate?

I don’t want to have a stroke, men!

never forgetti

Anyway, to clear the air, MasterDoggo, while I was certainly critical of certain aspects of your approach to judging, it’s not an issue that’s at all particularly focused on or singular to yourself. But it’s something that does need to be brought up time and time again because there’s always a certain tension between the fantasy land of Automation and the real life that it clearly emulates and the care required to navigate this is none more apparent than in CSR.

Either way, I already knew that the chances my car would suit your character were pretty slim from the start so I’m not complaining about being cut itself.


The fact is it take too much time for me, and it’s already since saturday the entries are closed. It’s a pleasure to host but it takes so much time, and I had lot of complain about the judging (more than I noted in the CSR I participate), sometimes it’s fair, sometimes it’s not. I always try to take those as an advice. I think I need more experience for hosting CSRs.




I use men, because I pronounce men like man, and vice versa. Not Google translate.


That’s an even more confusing reason than any other reason we could think of. Just how deep does the VMO rabbit hole go :joy:

edit: vmo is secretly a kiwi


I feel insulted


Oh yeah, I can see that working, now that you mention it.

Thankyou VMO, much appreciated!

Us native (and trained) English users prefer to write our words according to convention, rather than local idiom! :laughing:

Meh, we all fudge our first round, some are better at hiding it than others, that’s all! :space_invader:

As for the whole fixture count issue, my opinion is that your car should look like a car! That is, a four fixture, ten minute, crack whore car can be clearly mocked and dumped but a car that looks like an effort has been made need to be given more slack. I think consideration should be taken as to their skill level (so a newbie that looks OK is marked high and an average effort from a pro is marked down) and if the car is trying to fit the era or is clearly out of place.

A good way to ensure reasonable looking entrants is to provide sample pics of the genre you’re after and/or a heads up on design requirements (e.g. red turn signals, placement of mirrors etc.) then newbies can have an idea of what design level to aim for while veterans can look outside the box for extra inspiration if they so desire… :thinking:

Maybe the design leaders could do some fixture masterclasses to show newcomers how a little bit of imagination can go a long way! :laughing:


Fixtures are like music.

Simple can be beautiful and space can be well though-out. Complexity is good, but structure and repetitiveness are needed to not let it fall into chaos.


Ok so I sincerely apologise for hijacking the thread right now, because I feel my original point has been lost.

I don’t count myself by any means as a design leader. But my original point was that certain cars from certain eras simply don’t have many fixtures. Yes, putting certain things together can really enhance the look of a car and if you put effort into certain details it really elevates the car to become more lifelike. However there are also certain limitations like, in particular, how the number plate is placed depending on the cardinal locking one uses, where it ends up set ridiculously deep if the car’s shape is a bit funny.

I’m going to digress for a moment to publicly air some personal thoughts on something else I attempted to judge recently, the Automation Car Design Competition. I did the job faithfully and to the brief which specified that I had to judge according to the strict prespecified criteria. It’s certainly one way to judge a car that was made in Automation because on one hand we do like to acknowledge effort especially if somebody spends a minimum of 2 hours on designing a car or some shit like that. On the other hand, when it gets to a point where you’re going to applaud superfluous design flairs that aren’t actually period or demographic correct, then you have to admit that the culture is at risk of disappearing up its own anal orifice a bit, right? That’s what I want to avoid, regardless of how applicable that might be here.