Board Thread:Game Discussion/@comment-37667252-20191214060643/@comment-43421298-20191214130915

Cshaw1122 wrote:

By reading your short biting remarks, your understanding of diversity reminds me of the misunderstood argument that freedom of speech grants you the right to say whatever you want to say in the public. Really?

What your argument boils down to is: RR3 players should not be given cars that don't race in the real world or cars that are too slow to race in any top racing series. In other words, you want to enforce a specific vision on the entire game, disregarding what other players want from it.

The other problem is that your demands conflict with the design of the game. We don't race factory-grade cars; instead, we race souped-up fantasy versions of real-life cars. Arguing for more realism in a game that banks on fantasy (even if it's supposedly "real") is, let's say, charming.

So, it boils down to this: you are FREE to skip all the content you don't find interesting ("freedom of speech" broadly understood), but not to deny others the right to use it.

PS. Just to be clear, I also prefer, let's say, "lifelike" racing cars to supercars/street cars. I just don't see how the policy of adding older equivalents of the Silvia or the Focus conflicts in any way with the principles of the game as laid out at its inception. Within this framework, "motorsports" is the cherry on top, but the cake is made from ground Velosters and crushed Veyrons.

PPS. Also, neither the Civic, nor the Integra is a sedan in the modern sense.