Home | Wiki | Discord | Dev Stream | YouTube | Archived Forums | Contact

JDM Sport Icon AUTOMATION / BEAMNG CHALLENGE (entry closed)


#102

Majority of the forum knows english so doing it in a non-english language is a bit silly. But my bigger issue/question is: Do you even know what JDM Sport Icon even means, based on what ive seen here, it seems that you really dont even know your own show.


#103

Well, no - he wants a Supra/RX-7/GT-R but gives terrible rules and doesn’t tell anybody that he wants a Supra/RX-7/GTR then just gets butthurt and disqualifies everyone.


#104

For the best for me and my competition I will not reply more anyone, if you really want to help the future competitions enter in my discord and talk with us there, will be better for my control. I will continius posting updates here when a new video came out because some people like my challenge and I don’t want to harm they.

To reply some points:
The video language - I speak portuguese and I don’t have the slightest desire of make english videos or put english subtitle, the maximum I can do is the english notes that are in discription of my challenge videos. If is so important to you listen the video in english, please, consider don’t enter my next challenges.

“My car got disqualified” “You don’t know what is a Jdm / Sport car” - Is my fault don’t create a better discription what I want for the competition, but even without that I think it have a limit. In the second line of the challenge post I said what cars we are take of base to create the cars:

If you are not an idiot you know what to do, like the 27 entries of the competition. So a K-car is a JDM but isn’t comparable to a Skyline or any of the entries. An STI/Evo are Sport JDM cars, so much that I have car based on them who enter the competition. I don’t disqualified you for nothing, you got disqualified because don’t pay attention to the rules or make an idiot car who isn’t minimally sporting (and don’t come with this shit excuse of game bug/version, all cars are judge in the same way, you are not special).


#105

What a calm, rational and not at all spiteful host. I would have entered a Honda NSX comparable car, A CAR YOU SUGGESTED but you banned cars with less than 4 seats! Thus discounting the Rx7 as well,! Why would you suggest cars if we can’t make them? THIS is where the confusion is arising. Your rules were extremely unclear and it’s fairly obvious to everybody it’s coming down to literally nothing but your personal bias. Which you should have disclosed, but you didn’t. People are getting upset for a reason. You can choose to ignore it, or you can take the critism and improve for the future. I hope you’ll do the latter because doing the former is childish and quite ignorant.

It’s pretty obvious you’re not concerned for the sake of your competition, given the increasing perception turning against you. You’re concerned about yourself and that’s it. And let me tell you, this is not a good look for you.


#106

As everybody else is chiming in I might as well join.

As somebody who has hosted a few rounds of CSR before (and hosting the current one) I’m just going to note some things I find wrong here.

So you’re excluding over 90% of the forum. Great!

You say that, but then you banned anything with less than 2 seats making MR engines completely impossible so using the Honda NSX as an example is purely proving that it is almost impossible to determine exactly what was wanted.

Great, let’s start insulting people.

No, they’re not. They are rally cars that were then made for the road, not sport JDM cars. This once again proves that it is very unclear as to what you want.

Admittedly I didn’t enter, but the cars met the rules from what I have seen. An update adjusting certain factors that may have made the cars invalid all of a sudden is NOT the participant’s problem, it is yours for not noting the information down upon receiving the entry or not realising that the update can alter things. Your problem, not theirs.

Continued insulting. Don’t. There is no reason for it.


To summarise, you’re excluding most people, insulting them and blaming them for your ignorance. If you think anybody is going to take your results as valid anymore you’re utterly delusional.


EDIT:

This is impossible. Your link doesn’t work.


#107

Mmmm sopa do lute no fórum, uma delicia kkkk

Oh boy what a hole being dug

Aw shit, I was away for work and missed most of the mess. Well at least a lot of people already made most points I wanted to make and even new ones because it seems you doubled down on weird rules and weird binning.

In case you people hadn’t noticed my car was made to highlight the problems of this challenge, it was a protest entry. And it did that more than fine, it even seems to have struck a nerve, mission accomplished. Inb4 hurr you salty because bin: of course I fucking knew it was going to be binned. I made a fucking rear engined front wheel drive, the most absurd layout possible, automotive terrorism. And on top of that I made sure to give it crooked writing.

But oh this is gold :joy: You even binned people who made legitimate cars because you updated the game or because of game limitations. And my car did obviously not look Japanese, but your rules didn’t even say what to do to make it a “JDM” car. It seems what makes it JDM is silly Initial D memes though, as you had an issue with my car being FWD (oh no schport car can’t be FWD because dorifto!1!), or it being a hatchback and the challenge not being hot hatches, yet a fuckinf pickup made it through

Accept it, you handled the challenge like shit instead of considering very legitimate criticism and binning justly. Didn’t anything seem suspicious when meme cars started coming, hmm? Or when you updated and suddenly most people seemed to have gone barely above the limits, even serious entries?

Making a youtube channel does not make you an uncritizable genius who knows everything about the car and games. Like, I or any of us could go to youtube right now and click on the “create channel” button. Same for Discord. But yeah sure you can have a couple of echochambers and make crap challenges and become a shitty Bshar, or take criticism into account.

Oh and one final important thing. Despite being RF, my car was a very serious sports car: if you read the lore you’ll see that in 2003 it beat a Toyota Supra 7-1 laps in Interlagos with ease.


#108

i see you what you did there

OT: Admit that, this competition is a goddamn mess. I’m glad that I’m not participating it.


#109

Is this another case of the bshar, where people find a way to work around the broken rules and yet the host refuses to admit his mistake?


#110

Well, if you think about it in the form of “host thinks they have a clear and well communicated idea of what they wanted but in fact no and the rules reflected that and a lot of salt happened” then yeah I suppose since that’s about how every bshar video goes down as far as I understand :joy:

I mean this was exactly what I was getting at when I pointed out the NSX issue in the interest of balancing. It’s fair to ask for restrictions to balance things: the alternative would have been to weight the practicality score, for example. Either way the golden rule is that the judging really needs to fit the rules and the rules really need to fit the brief. Most of these complaints boil down to “the car fit the rules but still got binned because of some nebulous idea that isn’t well defined”. Many people here submitted variations because they specifically wanted to point this out when you presumably responded in ways that they expected which is exactly what happened.

At the very worst if you’re incapable of articulating what you want then advertise it very loud and clear that you’re going to use a subjective impression to decide who makes the cut. That’ll work perfectly because you will get barely any entries, except from everybody else who thinks they have a very clear idea of the brief and will inevitably disagree with you :laughing:


#111

The unjustified blanket ban on two-seaters also prevented us from making anything comparable to the MR2, MX-5 and S2000, all of which had only two seats each.

Sadly, the rule set for this challenge was so vague that I struggled to make sense of it, as a few others did. The absence of English subtitles or commentary in the associated videos didn’t help, especially since many of the users on this forum are also English speakers.

I am glad that I wasn’t binned right away, though. Now I am curious to see how well my entry does.


#112

First off, you made a community challenge on a forum where most of the users speak english either as a primary, or a secondary language, an actual review in english is kind of expected.

Secondly, if you were only gonna do a review in portuguese, you should have said so in the first post. No where did you say that, so dont complain about people asking for a review in english.

Thirdly, dont be a dick to people with genuine criticism of your challenge. Calling people idiots for not making the car you want when the rules of your challenge were so vague that it could interpreted you wanted an SUV isnt the fault of the person who entered your challenge. If you didnt want people to send in Kei cars, limos, SUVs, trucks etc, you should have put that in your rules.


#113

I have two points that got me triggered here.

That’s below the minimum of posting the actual notes in this thread. You can post all the Portuguese videos on Youtube you want after that.

To be fair though, that’s a shitty move. Regardless of the interpretation of JDM Sport Icon, undrivable cars and seeking the limits of the hard rules, ignoring the spirit (however unclear) of the theme and abandoning reasonableness is annoying and frustrating for the competition organiser.

That’s the reason I always make the disclaimer I can subjectively raise an issue with a car, even if it falls under the hard rules in my competitons.

Even in my last one I have an example:


#114

I don’t mean to derail the thread by laboring the point but this is actually quite an important distinction to make.

Yes but also hell no.

  • In any competitive pursuit there is always a tension between the spirit of the game and the letter of the law. After all, it’s not a competition if one doesn’t use the entire latitude of the rules to get ahead right? (In a race I’m notorious for doing this among others.) It should have been abundantly obvious from how real motorsport codes must have a lot of technical regulations to try and keep play “fair” (however this is interpreted), and clearly define what is “cheating” (e.g. F1 flexi wing for extra downforce versus WRC Celica with the fake boost-limit turbo seal).

  • That basically means that if something was allowable in the rules but you don’t like it, your rules sucked and you need to make them better. When we’re not memeing the shit out of a ruleset there’s a subset of people around here, like always, that will absolutely tear the rules apart and break them down. That’s why the good competitions have thorough play-testing and often undergo quite a bit of development and feedback before it’s done (think of how much work Chips’ ARXL was: that took months and months of development and it came off absolutely flawlessly and nobody could complain about how it ran). Now I’m not asking that every single challenge be run like that because that would be absolutely absurd…

  • …but that does imply that one’s strictness in judging should be proportional to the rigour of the rules. The rules here were not rigorous. In fact even I was worried that I’d get binned because I submitted an ass-backwards Subaru (JDM sports cars rear-engined since when???) and instead of having “276bhp” it had more like 411 (very not-gentlemanly) and I couldn’t tell whether bruno wanted a stock model or a tuned model. There was actually very little communication as to what kind of car he actually wanted and so while there were certainly some grounds to suspect that some of the entries were done in a spirit of mockery it takes a certain brazenness to actually out and accuse as flagrantly as was done (and, in some cases, wrongly imho).

I should also point out that many have already tried the whole “JDM sport” thing and failed miserably before this. Given the nature of the game, it’s probably best to work out a more solid metric than have the main premise revolve around evocation.


#115

No, I fully agree with all those points, especially your third. My comment was more in general, and to argue it was clear in this case!

I am a fan of both stringent rule competitions, as well as leaving people almost absolute freedom, without it devolving in a meme fest too much. But communication of expectations and criteria is important either way. And this is what went wrong here.


#116

Fair enough to think that, can’t change your mind. But the way he communicated the reasoning behind his rules was incomprehensible and was pretty much without justification. You can see in what he discarded that he pretty much just took his personal consideration into account. It was an outward manifestation of frustration of the rules not being clearly communicated, and I don’t think it was against the spirit of the challenge, given how, quite frankly ridiculous his definition of “spirit” is. He threw out rally cars, and Kei cars alike saying they are not “sport coupe icons”, when as I stated in my previous post there are several examples IRL. Not to mention i’m Pretty sure he accepted a truck. So it was pretty much a crapshoot of what was actually what he wanted. Other than literally just making an AE86…

So overall, I think it was a nessacary dick move. We all didn’t send just for “the lols” mostly but rather out of frustration, hence why there are so many non compliant entries.


#117

I can’t really say too much about my car being disqualified. I did it for fun, I had my fun, whatever.

All I have are lingering questions though:

Engine Engineering time: 120

I watched your announcement video and you made a 2 valve-per-cylinder inline-6 which just made it under the limit. Correct me if I’m wrong but did any sporty 6cyl engine from the 2000s only use 12 valves? The RB25-26 AND the 2JZ both had 24 valves, with only the RB20 (which was used in vehicles within the 80s and 90s) having 12 valves. What justifies the decision to make the engineering time low when you’re expecting Supras, NSXes and Skylines?

What about benchmarks too?

You did make a benchmark, fair, but what justifies the decision to only make one? Furthermore, one which does just about the bare minimum. Wasn’t the premise of “JDM ICONS” to break bounds and stand out?

Must have 4 seats

Like many others above, I find this constraint questionable. Why invalidate sports car entries such as the NSX or S2000 when that’s pretty much what you’re looking for?

A lot of us also noticed that our entries got DQed for not meeting restrictions, although they did before an update. Did you have anything in check to verify that the submissions initially met the constraints? Did you check with people who initially violated the rules? This is typically good practice as it can document who met the rules and who didn’t, especially under the risk of a stat-changing update.

Surely you binned a hot hatch under the premise that it was a sports car challenge, yet passed a minivan, a truck and a muscle car. Any reason for this? Was it because they still met the constraints post-update? The disqualifications feel inconsistent.

I’m not trying to hurl insults, that’s out of my intentions. Just, a lot in this challenge comes off either ambiguous or contradictory to me. Maybe place body restrictions during the next challenge? Maybe create more than one benchmark? Hopefully lessons have been learned?


#118

Even I did not participate this “challenge”, but I have something for concern.

Since there were many entries got DQed for not meeting the restriction after the update, as far as I have hosted the challenge (please read CSR83, which I hosted) and there were many discrepancies after the update (many participant were understood the changes and the accpetance of using “small MR body”).

In this case, if the update has affected to many entries, you’d better notify of the affect and give some time for revision or else it would not be “fair” competition.

That’s my only concern.


#119

That I can agree with and comprehend :slight_smile:


#120

It seems somehow that I wasn’t instabinned, but since nothing is making much sense to anyone anyway I think I won’t be paying much attention to this anymore.
I 100% agree with everyone’s anger here, it is stupid and hopefully there can be some improvements to this competition.


#121

annnnd this challenge is now officially abandoned and dead.

ggwp.