EA Sports WRC: Gameplay Revealed

wm-sweden-mg-metro-6r4-86-05.jpg.adapt_.1456w.jpg
A video showcasing raw EA Sports WRC gameplay has just launched, showing the game in many conditions. How does it hold up compared to Dirt Rally 2.0?

Image credit: EA Sports/Codemasters

One of the big titles on the way in the next few weeks is EA Sports WRC. Yes, as of yesterday, 3 October, the game is now within a month of its release. With launch approaching fast, EA Sports is in the middle of a promotion campaign with weekly showcase videos.

The most recent launched today, showing raw EA Sports WRC gameplay on a variety of stages, in a host of cars and differing conditions. The first chance to see what the game will offer players on 3 November, how good does the game look from afar? Here’s our rundown of the video.


Stage Design​

With the official WRC licence, Codemasters and EA have been able to better replicate stages one might see on the sport’s worldwide feed. As a result, one should be able to gain a sense of immersion when driving on any of the whopping 600 individual kilometres set to feature in the game.

This video showcased three stages; one from Rally Estonia, one from Rally Japan and one from Sweden. Beside the stereotypical rice fields of Japan and Swedish snow, these stages do go some way to encapsulate their real-world rallies. The Swedish location in particular does a great job of putting the player on faster than usual roads for the snowy round.

It is clear that the move from Ego to the Unreal Engine is helping the developers create larger environments. In Dirt Rally 2.0, stages were often lined with trees with very few far-reaching views. Now however, the game seems to feature wide-open spaces with roads passing through expansive fields.

wrc23-game-features-08-16x9.jpg.adapt_.crop16x9.1455w-1024x576.jpg

Stages look more open in EA Sports WRC. Image credit: EA Sports

It is also plain to see that the previous game, WRC Generations, was not created by the same team as this new release. Adopting a more focused sense, the stages are not full of life and celebration like the KT Games locations. Be it a good thing or a bad thing, this is something fans may notice from this EA Sports WRC gameplay footage.

Audio in EA Sports WRC​

Even back in the early Dirt games baring Colin McRae’s name, audio was never something Codemasters struggled to perfect. That appears to be true with EA Sports WRC as well.

Onboard sounds from each of the three cars in the video seem correct. The blend of engine noise and transmission whine feels like a good compromise. Elsewhere, the clunks and bashes of bump impacts do not appear too intrusive. A key moment in the Rally Estonia footage is the tyre screech upon transitioning from dirt to tarmac. This is something one would rarely hear in Dirt Rally 2.0, a positive sign for the handling.

Physics: DR2.0 Improvement?​

The most important element of this gameplay video for many is surely the chance to see how EA Sports WRC handles. Since the beginning, Codemasters and EA have said that the game will use handling model from Dirt Rally 2.0 with some improvements, notably to tarmac.

EA-Sports-WRC-Ford-Fiesta.jpg

Image credit: EA Sports WRC

In fact, the 2019 title launched to mixed success. For loose surface driving, the game was and still is industry leading. However, the tarmac rallies such as Spain and Poland often saw players complain. An overall floaty feeling overwhelmed the wheel and cars would respond poorly. Much like wet weather in racing sims sometimes seen as dry physics with the grip turned down, DR2.0‘s tarmac handling felt like gravel physics with the grip turned up.

The good news is that Codemasters seems to have done a good job at addressing the issue. The Japanese stage showcased in particular in this gameplay video sees the Hyundai i20N grip to the surface better. As one must expect for a rally car not built for circuit racing, the car does slide. But the loss of grip appears to be far more gradual and later in a corner, rather than immediately on turn-in.


Setting stages in different seasons seems to nicely affect grip as well. Early on in the Japanese stage, Jon Armstrong drives the opening sector in winter, with ice and snow lining the course. It seems this provides less grip to the rear end, in a nice way. However, it does seem that the front end retains perhaps a touch too much grip. This is what makes the car appear to rotate around the centre of the car. However, the drier conditions do not feature the same issue.

It is worth noting that Armstrong is a developer for Codemasters and a professional rally driver. Therefore, his driving style and approach to the game may alter how it looks. For instance, smoother inputs make give the car a more approachable look. But for the most part, it is fair to say that EA Sports WRC appears to be a good step forward from Dirt Rally 2.0.

What do you make of the EA Sports WRC gameplay showcase? Tell us on Twitter at @OverTake_gg or in the comments down below!
About author
Angus Martin
Motorsport gets my blood pumping more than anything else. Be it physical or virtual, I'm down to bang doors.

Comments

At least if you don't like this version, there will be a new (but near identical) version next year (for another £50). Ah, but next year's iteration will have super re-worked physics, new improved graphics, new liveries, one entirely new rally (maybe), definitely VR this time (or maybe not), and will be fully supported for 6 months until hype starts for the next £65 version the following year.
There won't be a new game next year. There's no year in the title of the game.
 
I think it looks rather good, however the roads look flat, Sweden and Estonia have smooth roads, but they still look with very little detail, I fear the road physics and feel will be severely lacking.

RBR is still king because of the road feel above all IMHO, no other rally game has managed to make the car feel like it's going through rocky, uneven off roads.
 
There won't be a new game next year. There's no year in the title of the game.
Codemasters acquired the exclusive license for WRC games, to start in 2023 and for five years after. - Wiki.

Maybe they will, maybe they won't. It would be strange if they did not as both EA and WRC themselves obviously want revenue and until now WRC has been an annual release (with minimal incremental changes, in both Kilo's WRC and Codies' F1).


Codemasters were always awful, even before EA acquisition. Three decent titles in over thirty years, imo - DR1, Operation Flashpoint and Chaos Engine. But even DR1 ain't that great: awful UI, stupid 'sticky gravel' on the sides of track, minimal content, automatic drifts, rubbish replays/cameras, weird weight to the cars, crap garage/setups......

No crashes in any videos for this junk yet? Not a single dent or scratch seen so far. I bet they re-use that ridiculous system of allowing you to drive 2m off the course before magically plopping you back on track (and adding 30 seconds). Sure - who wants to see crashes in a game when you make a dreadful mistake and the car should be totally obliterated? No, let's just magically stop the car a few yards off the course, put it back on track, and simply add a penalty. What a nonsense.

And lets have all the same old cars. Again. With no discernible handling characteristics between FWD, RWD or AWD! Anybody else notice that in the footage the car doesn't even leave a track in the snow - so what of this supposed "track wear" and rutting if you start down the field? I can't even see a representation of it and it doesn't seem like your own car leaves any mark. Oh wow, amazing. And let's have the same old crappy replay system. Again.

Nothing suggests a high performance car on a loose surface to me. Nothing! Granted, it's difficult to do - modelling contact/no contact with ground is difficult, as is loose/liquid surface. But look at SnowRunner? That does a way, way better job albeit at much lower speed. Until somebody does that for rally I don't think we can expect anything much from a loose surface "sim". Just roads painted to look (a bit) like dirt.

I'm not disappointed though - because I never expected anything but the usual junk from EA/CM.
 
Codies have confirmed the game will be an annual release, and stated the first installment costs less to draw in more new players, and because EA accommodated for it. I mean, they obviously accommodated by paying interns to make it, given how the gameplay looks, but it it is what it is...
 
You know when a "big" company hires a "professional" driver to advertise their game...it's gonna be a disaster, ex pcars and from what I see wrc 23
SLRE is a good game. Milestone did some good work on the physics with Loeb's feedback, but it was problematic because of their trademark, absolute lack of quality control. It has a permanent place in my PC.
 
The catch is, there isn't and has never been a professional full-on rally sim developer.
Ian Bell missed a huge opportunity. The "rally" part of PC2 felt really really good. He could have made a really awesome rally game out of it.
 
Do you think so??
AMS2 "survives" with an average of 300-400 players... how many players has RBR daily? Anyone has data about?
I don't think so !
I know so ;)

It's basically comes down to business !
They invest and expects a profit !

Rally is a niche product and there simply ain't enough gamers on the planet to motivate a true rally sim product !
 
You know when a "big" company hires a "professional" driver to advertise their game...it's gonna be a disaster, ex pcars and from what I see wrc 23
Most "professional" drivers have no clue on what to expect from a game/sim since most of them aren't gamers to begin with !

And even if a real driver use a game/sim why should they say that they support it if they don't get paid ?

I keep rediscover RBR Vanilla several times a year since 2004.

There simply doesn't exist a more true to life Rally game/Sim to date !
 
Last edited:
Most "professional" drivers have no clue on what to expect from a game/sim since most of them aren't gamers to begin with !

And even if a real driver use a game/sim why should they say that they support it if they don't get paid ?

I keep rediscover RBR Vanilla several times a year since 2004.

There simply doesn't exist a more true to life Rally game/Sim to date !
for how good the driving physics and the force feedback is in RBR (and it's so good that for me it is unrivaled today, especially the feedback), the sim show all its age and it looks like ****. now i can play a rpg made with pixels big as coins since in an rpg what is important is the story, the characters, the dialogues and the combats. In a driving sims is important first and foremost the driving physics, but the the vehicles models and the beauty of the enviroment you racing trough are pretty important too. i have a 3000 euro pc, sorry if i want to use it for something newer than rbr
 
Most "professional" drivers have no clue on what to expect from a game/sim since most of them aren't gamers to begin with !

And even if a real driver use a game/sim why should they say that they support it if they don't get paid ?

I keep rediscover RBR Vanilla several times a year since 2004.

There simply doesn't exist a more true to life Rally game/Sim to date !
What? Most professional drivers either use sims for fun and/or use factory DIL sims for testing and development. Somehow claiming that real drivers don’t know better (while also in the past saying that “Only real drivers” know how RBR is better) is laughable. Not to mention Jon Armstrong actually came from sim racing first and winning the WRC eSports championship in 2018 so I’d say he is fairly qualified to talk about sims
 
What? Most professional drivers either use sims for fun and/or use factory DIL sims for testing and development. Somehow claiming that real drivers don’t know better (while also in the past saying that “Only real drivers” know how RBR is better) is laughable. Not to mention Jon Armstrong actually came from sim racing first and winning the WRC eSports championship in 2018 so I’d say he is fairly qualified to talk about sims
And, if you look through his videos, you will find Jon driving like a master on RBR.
 
Hurts my eyes... :cry:
Same year GT7 and Forza released to show how good the new gen can look. Rally games could be a perfect showcase of graphical power, with big natural landscapes and weather effects. But no, it will be a quick cash grab. Sad.
I'm not even sure how you can grab the cash when every customer can see with their own eyes how bad everything looks, from the unconvincing slippy-slidey chase cam, to the confusingly bad graphics.
 
I'm not even sure how you can grab the cash when every customer can see with their own eyes how bad everything looks, from the unconvincing slippy-slidey chase cam, to the confusingly bad graphics.
The majority of modern "gamers" doesn't care. They just want shinny new stuff, no matter at what state they are or if they're any good at all. They have a lot of money to spend and they will buy anything you throw at them.
They value quantity over quality. Just mindless consumerism. Keep making "new" games every 6 months and they're happy. They just want to buy.
This is why the "early access" or "beta" and DLC models became the norm.This is why most games are being released unfinished and unpolished (at best) and require a ton of updates. This is why games are becoming worse.
 
The topic of simulation in car video games is not a philosophical topic in itself, but that does not prevent us from philosophizing about it.
What is Simulation? What is Arcade?
The term Arcade does not appear in the RAE dictionary, the verb simulate does.
To simulate is to imitate...emulate...copy...wanting to represent or resemble...
By definition, then, every car game is basically a simulator, however, it will be its degree of "seriousness" and rigor that will determine whether it is called a simulator or arcade.

What is debatable, therefore, will always be that we consider it as "rigorous simulation", perhaps it is that three or four spectators help us get back on track as in RBR, or that we go over the audience, and the screen acquires a reddish tint and we must restart ? ..or that many setbacks happen to us, and that "the learning curve is slow"?

Personally, I would prefer to abolish this bad habit of dividing games into simulators and arcades, simply because even the best of "Simulators" will always have a lot of arcade stuff, since "pure simulation" does not exist. - even the best Boing Simulator surely has an invisible line that separates the real from the purely simulated - although let's face it, in that particular case, that line must be so thin and transparent that it will surely be almost invisible.

Get into an accident in any simulator and you will only have to restart to be able to continue playing, in reality people get hospitalized.
From which we can isolate at least one great General Rule: in every simulator, the player's imagination represents a large percentage of the equation.
It is a liar, then, to talk about "pure and simple simulation" since none of them are, except for Boing simulators, First World armies, fighters, tanks, submarines, etc.

For PC, there is only something very inferior and simple, with which some tend to take sides - in some cases even fanaticism - "what if rF2... what if rbr... what if iR what if P.Cars... What if Assetto... what if someone else is Arcade"..
In twenty years who knows what Dirt Rally will look like, today I see it as another combination of Simulation and Arcade, like RBR and all the others. If you step off the track in Assetto your car will slow down, that is copied from Grid Autosport and is a VERY Arcade detail and in bad taste in my opinion, let's see if in a real race your car will slow down because you will you left the track. And just like that, absolutely all Simulators have their Arcade details (let's clarify: one thing is to slow down due to lack of traction - that is realistic - and another thing is to lose power as a "punishment" from the AI)

What do we leave then for the Arcade (who are not usually 100% that way either) perhaps only the "contempt" for being "inferior"??
Is a Dirt2/3 bad...is a WRC 3/4 lousy?? Of course not...they are actually so Arcade, I don't think so.
They try to "simulate" everything in their own way, no one wants to make a car game only for it to be labeled as an Arcade, but the terror of every game programmer is that two days after its launch the "I had it in two games" becomes viral. hours"..
That's why every programmer worth their salt will first try to create enough "difficulties" so that that doesn't happen. We see this very clearly in both RBR and Dirt Rally, it is there where I would emphasize whether the simulator is yes or no and the key would be represented with a simple question: "Does this game force me to resolve setbacks in the same way?" What would I do if it were a real car? There's the "kid" of the matter.

Well, for the RAlly Cross of Dirt Rally, my answer is clearly YES. In real life, if that were the case I would do exactly the same thing I do in the game, and the car in the game responds predictably as it would in reality.
That's what I call Realistic Simulation = Simulator.

But if the case is a Mini... a Fulvia etc in Wales, Greece etc... well there the answer is NO. In a real car you could go faster and safer, the car at 60k/m would still be completely predictable in its behavior, something that obviously does not happen in Dirt Rally. Here we already have the combination of Simulation and Arcade in the same game, as well as in RBR in rF2... in Assetto and all the ones that have and will be...
There is a contradiction between believing that a game is more simulative the slower its "learning curve" is, since what programmers generally use to slow down said curve are arcade traps, and not realistic difficulties.
Real example: if we invite a driver 3 (or even a taximeter) who has never played with anything, to play with any car simulator, he will not be able to advance 50 meters without some mishap happening and another and another and another, why? ?
because you have to "get the hang of" every game, something that any gamer would do without a problem, a professional driver with no experience in games could not do for that same reason. This clearly gives the tone that the difficulties of a game are the same as the real ones, but that they are artificial and imaginative difficulties, but not realistic, which is why even Loeb or Ogier would fall for them as the best.

When there is a real Rally Simulator in 20..30..50 years the difficulty will not lie in avoiding trees or "magnetized" gates, nor in stopping a car that accelerates on its own when approaching any obstacle, which takes 2 seconds to changing gears in a sequential box, a car that either brakes little or brakes a lot, depending on what suits the AI to harm you, a car that shuts down the engine at the slightest touch, in that Simulator that I can imagine the difficulty will lie in go over 100...in braking just as if it were an F1 in Monza...in knowing how to steal tenths in each turn, etc. but that is still a long way off...
And the graphics do think they are brilliant and I have them set to "medium", as for the sound, it differs depending on the cars, but the best ones are very realistic, the game is improving and is only at 80%, without There is no doubt that it is the best Rally Simulator and it will surely continue to be so for a long time.
Where the only annoying defect that I see is that little jump that the graphics make every four or five seconds, which I don't know if it happens to everyone, but what reason would there be for it to do it on my PC either.
 
What? Most professional drivers either use sims for fun and/or use factory DIL sims for testing and development. Somehow claiming that real drivers don’t know better (while also in the past saying that “Only real drivers” know how RBR is better) is laughable. Not to mention Jon Armstrong actually came from sim racing first and winning the WRC eSports championship in 2018 so I’d say he is fairly qualified to talk about sims
Ahh the stereotypical Codie Fangirl !

What's laughable is when people cherry picks and make it the norm

Thanks for the comedy !
 

Latest News

Article information

Author
Angus Martin
Article read time
4 min read
Views
6,475
Comments
65
Last update

To join the OverTake Racing Club races I want them to be: (multiple choice)

  • Free to access

    Votes: 167 87.4%
  • Better structured events

    Votes: 32 16.8%
  • Better structured racing club forum

    Votes: 28 14.7%
  • More use of default game content

    Votes: 28 14.7%
  • More use of fixed setups

    Votes: 56 29.3%
  • No 3rd party registration pages

    Votes: 70 36.6%
  • Less casual events

    Votes: 17 8.9%
  • More casual events

    Votes: 65 34.0%
  • Other, specify in thread

    Votes: 12 6.3%
Back
Top