Commentaires
| Page liée | Auteur | Message |
|---|---|---|
enzo96 2016-08-13 18:14 | Or maybe they had licensing issues, but yeah I don't have the game because it's one of the worst freemium apps that I ended up deleting, so I was curious to know why they called it race edition but I think I got my answer | |
Burn Rubber
2016-08-13 14:48 | AKA the crappy fermium game developers didnt care enough to contact Amuse and get rights to that name. | |
enzo96 2016-08-13 13:54 | So I suppose this isn't an official kit S2000 but more like made up from the game and inspired by a real kit brand | |
Rinspeed
2016-08-13 12:10 | enzo96 a écrit Alright but why is it called race edition? Is that an official name or is just just a name out on by the game? it's a name in the game | |
enzo96 2016-08-13 12:04 | Alright but why is it called race edition? Is that an official name or is just just a name out on by the game? | |
Automotive Gaming
2016-08-12 21:05 | Don't get too much hyped, only the livery is kinda inspired, the 2F2F S2K had a full VeilSide bodykit, doesn't look like this one in Racing Rivals. www.veilsidejpn.com/product/images/re_S2000_Millenium_F.jpg This kit in Racing Rivals is very close to the Amuse GT1 kit for the S2K, apart the fact it has a different front bumper: naritadogfight.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/dsc01253.jpg -- Last edit: 2016-08-12 21:07:13 | |
AutoTracker
2016-08-12 20:36 | Perhaps based on this? www.imcdb.org/vehicle_2235-Honda-S2000-AP1-2001.html | |
Dragonboy
2016-08-12 18:16 | LP 750-4 SV not Superveloce (eventhough it stands for that) -- Last edit: 2016-08-12 18:19:39 | |
Dragonboy
2016-08-12 18:16 | This is listed completely wrong. ST stands for Super Trofeo. It should be listed as 2012 Lamborghini Gallardo LP 570-4 Super Trofeo Stradale. All part of the model name, no extra info. Please change admin | |
jus1029
2016-08-12 17:57 | Suki? -- Last edit: 2016-08-12 17:57:23 | |
Burn Rubber
2016-08-07 18:41 | It really is weird... | |
enzo96 2016-08-07 18:33 | From what I see I'm agreeing with speed freaks, weird choice to put this as 2015 indeed | |
speedfreak975
2016-08-07 09:18 | its from 2015 not of 2015 there is a huge difference. plus many concepts were released same way yet none treated same. so whats special about this car. just remove the year. because literally on all the internet we are the only ones with the "2015 GT" | |
Rinspeed
2016-08-07 09:14 | Calm down! For Burn Rubber,Nike One isn't a real car... and Nike isn't a real car maker... So no need to take this as example. Like always, years for US cars are ramdom (and no Burn Rubber, it's not the case in all the world, in Europe, year of production/sale=year of car) but the proto is from 2015 and announced the 2017 production version sold in 2016. So the proto is from 2015. And i will not discuss more about that. | |
speedfreak975
2016-08-07 09:01 | no that's not how cars work. case not closed. i still dont fathom the fact you actually think it up to you to choose years. We follow the brands thats IT. no matter how stupid. the whole argument was stupid and useless | |
Burn Rubber
2016-08-07 06:31 | So what your saying is it IS a 2017. Because that's what Ford labeled it as. Not 2015. Kinda contradicted yourself there. :P | |
IGPD
2016-08-07 05:50 | The car in this game is based on the concept car. The concept car was revealed in 2015, therefore it is 2015. This is not the production car, therefore it is not a 2017. If a car maker clearly states a year (example 2022 Nike), then that year is used. Case closed. | |
Burn Rubber
2016-08-07 03:13 | If there isn't a version of the vehicle branded as a 2015 we can't list it that way. Besides, the Nike One was designed YEARS ago and yet we listed it as a 2022. This is different how? | |
Automotive Gaming
2016-08-07 03:11 | We do not care about what the brands say! They only do that for creating hype and more interest in a car already available nowadays. It's a stupid marketing strategy, get over it. | |
Burn Rubber
2016-08-07 03:07 | Very offsetting tone... That's not the point. The makers of the car themselves call it a 2017. The concept is of the 2017 model, so really, why is this a 2015? | |
Automotive Gaming
2016-08-07 03:02 | Burn Rubber, if I go buy a 2017 Camry now, the registration will have 2016 written in it. Do you know what a registration is? This thing here: mycurrencyexchange.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/renewal_notice-IL-Copy.jpg It will have written "Vehicle Year 2016" because we can't time travel yet. -- Last edit: 2016-08-07 03:03:36 | |
Burn Rubber
2016-08-07 02:58 | Well TBH I'm getting really irritated. ![]() Besides, I have laid my cards on the table. I don't think there's much more I can do here. | |
speedfreak975
2016-08-07 02:45 | I know its how you talk ![]() its just the "bam" was uncalled for and can be misinterpreted as an insult especially with the stricter laws we dont need that | |
Burn Rubber
2016-08-07 02:42 | I'm not insulting anybody... Oh and look at this. More Toyotas labeled 2017s in 2016. imgur.com/eMo5qZP imgur.com/1dj0kih Vehicle years are weird. So? And let's not forget the Nike one 2022 Concept. Which is listed as 2022 igcd.net/vehicle.php?id=4200 | |
speedfreak975
2016-08-07 02:40 | alot of cars under registration are altered to fulfil government laws. the hennessey venom is a highly powered exige. how about you two grow up (stop insulting each other) and follow the statement by the company. they can release a 2050 concept and you could literally do nothing about it. let it slide. the car world isnt perfect | |
Burn Rubber
2016-08-07 02:36 | Well right there it says 2017. I don't get where you're seeing a 6 on that box. | |
Automotive Gaming
2016-08-07 02:34 | Yeah lol "bam" whatever *opens the registration, reads year 2016* | |
Burn Rubber
2016-08-07 02:21 | Before anyone calls BS on the Camry being form 2017: i.imgur.com/t2mT5JL.png Bam. Straight from the official website. | |
speedfreak975
2016-08-07 02:20 | plus another case the Mercedes-AMG GTR. AMG stated that it was a 2017 model yet it was revealed as a preview in 2016 that doesn't make it a 2016 model. almost every company is doing what Ford did -- Last edit: 2016-08-07 02:25:11 | |
speedfreak975
2016-08-07 02:16 | Automotive Gaming a écrit Ok go re-list the 2002 GT Concept as 2004-2005 so, right?? Please! Because the 2002 GT Concept was showcasing the upcoming 2004-2005 model so that automatically makes the 2002 Concept a 2004-2005, right?? Again, please! well technically no becuse ford stated it was 2002-2003 car back then because that time jumping was a thing yet -- Last edit: 2016-08-07 02:22:04 | |
Automotive Gaming
2016-08-07 02:13 | Burn Rubber a écrit The concept is showcasing a 2017 vehicle. Making it a 2017. Concepts are never produced to the public, so why list the year for a vehicle never driven by anyone other than Ford workers? (And maybe some special people like Car And Driver or other car magazines) Ford has stated it is a 20217. So listing it as anything else is ridiculous. Ok go re-list the 2002 GT Concept as 2004-2005 so, right?? Please! Because the 2002 GT Concept was showcasing the upcoming 2004-2005 model so that automatically makes the 2002 Concept a 2004-2005, right?? Again, please! -- Last edit: 2016-08-07 02:14:50 | |
Burn Rubber
2016-08-07 02:11 | As far as today, The concept model is exactly the same as the planned production model. So that point is invalid for now. The concept is showcasing a 2017 vehicle. Making it a 2017. Concepts are never produced to the public, so why list the year for a vehicle never driven by anyone other than Ford workers? (And maybe some special people like Car And Driver or other car magazines) Ford has stated it is a 20217. So listing it as anything else is ridiculous. You can buy a 2017 Toyota Camry right now. In 2016. So they year it was made doesn't mean nothing. -- Last edit: 2016-08-07 02:12:45 | |
Automotive Gaming
2016-08-07 02:11 | Just because of a stupid statement by the brand, we won't list this one as 2017, and the production model as 2017 aswell, if not even 2016 since afaik it will enter production later this year. I mean.. come on?! | |
speedfreak975
2016-08-07 02:07 | technically its of 2015 like many concepts seen but the company stated that its a 2017 so why argue when we basically follow valid statements . this is a licensed car so respect its brand . plus to be honest it felt more of a prototype than a concept which differ. | |
Automotive Gaming
2016-08-07 02:02 | Burn Rubber a écrit This still needs to be listed as a 2017. It was not produced in 2015 and the concept is of the 2017 model. Wrong! Once again, this is the 2015 concept for the upcoming 2017 production model. Is this so hard to understand? -- Last edit: 2016-08-07 02:02:48 | |
speedfreak975
2016-08-07 02:00 | Burn Rubber a écrit 1. It's not pretending. It's the model year. 2. This still needs to be listed as a 2017. It was not produced in 2015 and the concept is of the 2017 model. true but sometimes some companies just do stupid things....buying a car of a year that still didnt come yet was kind of stupid eventhough it was technically December | |
Burn Rubber
2016-08-07 01:57 | 1. It's not pretending. It's the model year. 2. This still needs to be listed as a 2017. It was not produced in 2015 and the concept is of the 2017 model. | |
speedfreak975
2016-08-07 01:56 | i know I'm not with that trend at all. and yes im referring to other models considering ford is not the only guilty party. alot do it. all im saying we should respect their stupid rules because we depend on hard facts....no matter how stupid it looks. and i understand we bought a 2010 yaris in Q4 of 2009... lol | |
Automotive Gaming
2016-08-07 01:52 | 100+ entries? Afaik there are only few Ford GT Mk2 here, unless you are referring to other cars. By the way, sadly it's this new tendency from car brands of adding +1 year if not +2 to their models to be faulty, like if their cars are from the future. But when you gotta sell your car, I doubt that, if you bought it in 2015, you'll pretend it's 2016 m.y. lol. -- Last edit: 2016-08-07 01:54:59 | |
speedfreak975
2016-08-07 01:49 | well its too late, if this is accepted over 100s of entries need to be altered. plus the whole point of a Motorshow is for brands to blazon their future models. so the years should not be messed with. we should follow what the respective brand reveals about their model. we have no right to alter it -- Last edit: 2016-08-07 01:49:53 | |
Automotive Gaming
2016-08-07 01:34 | speedfreak975 a écrit plus your thinking is faulty when your depending on whar year a car is built. considering the 2017 production model will be built from 2016 and considering not all concepts and prototypes which this falls under a proto more are built in a year the LFA took years for example so your logic is questionable Especially about concept cars, these must be listed considering when these were shown. For example, the Ford GT Mk1 Concept has been shown in 2002? It has been obviously listed as a 2002 model year. Then, the production of the road legal version begun in 2004, so, as I said before, it's the exactly same thing as this Mk2 Ford GT, they both had a gap of 2 years between the shown concept and the road legal version which has been/will be produced. -- Last edit: 2016-08-07 01:37:37 | |
Burn Rubber
2016-08-07 01:31 | speedfreak975 a écrit plus your thinking is faulty when your depending on whar year a car is built. considering the 2017 production model will be built from 2016 and considering not all concepts and prototypes which this falls under a proto more are built in a year the LFA took years for example so your logic is questionable Yeah. Most cars are named a year later than they are made. (Some 2012 cars are made in 2011 for example) So that logic is indeed questionable. | |
speedfreak975
2016-08-07 01:14 | Automotive Gaming a écrit Ford says this is a 2017 because in 2017 it will enter production, but the car we all saw, we know it has been built in 2015 since it's not the production version plus your thinking is faulty when your depending on whar year a car is built. considering the 2017 production model will be built from 2016 and considering not all concepts and prototypes which this falls under a proto more are built in a year the LFA took years for example so your logic is questionable -- Last edit: 2016-08-07 01:18:16 | |
speedfreak975
2016-08-07 00:56 | sure in that logic all cars from the detroit motor show are 2015 models..... -_- i honestly dont care anymore. im not sure why all this nonsense. this isnt even the first entry for this car on IGCD. this isnt different from any of the entries so this fuss is stupid and pointless. Ford announced the car as a future model. the 2002 GT was announced as a 2003 GT40 later to be known as GT. so that entry isnt the most reliable proof yet on netcarshow its labeled as 2002 and the IGCD entry follows that.yet once it comes to the 2017 model things change... -- Last edit: 2016-08-07 01:03:14 | |
Automotive Gaming
2016-08-07 00:03 | That ain't a proof. Anyway, re-read what I posted, you might understand if you think more about it -- Last edit: 2016-08-07 00:04:31 | |
Burn Rubber
2016-08-06 23:58 | Be smart? I'm providing proof it is a 2017. I'm not being a moron. ![]() | |
Automotive Gaming
2016-08-06 23:52 | BR please stop it now and be smart | |
Burn Rubber
2016-08-06 23:50 | imgur.com/sT3T4AC Same model as the in-game car. It can't be a 2015. | |
Automotive Gaming
2016-08-06 23:44 | It's 2015, and it's the same exact thing as this Concept: www.igcd.net/vehicle.php?id=2506 Production: www.igcd.net/vehicle.php?id=90254 | |
Burn Rubber
2016-08-06 23:43 | It's a 2017... |
