Forza Motorsport to Feature Brand New Tire Model, Tire Compounds

[McLaren]

Comparing ETS2 to a hypothetical open world race simulator feels like comparing DCS and MS Flight Simulator. They're both flight sims but they're not even slightly the same thing and I'm not sure that there's much overlap between their target markets at all.

Also, ETS2 is nearly ten years old and is regularly on sale for less than $5. Sales numbers start to mean a lot less when a game is basically being given away over such an extended period of time. Even I have a copy of ETS2, and I've played it for like an hour and a half. It's chill and I can see why people like it, but I don't find myself itching to go back and play it. Just because I own a copy doesn't mean I'd buy an open world race sim.

ETS2 also has a large mod community behind it to constantly keep it fresh that I assume, SCS fully appreciates & supports. That community makes it easy to keep the game's life-support going strong when it can consistently add in trucks, trailers, real world companies, AI/Sound/Physics changes or literally new countries. I think SMS also add in their own updates/content even to date.

 

[ShawnPhillips]

I for one would Love an open world racing game that leans more towards a proper sim handling Physics. Even just straight up copy-pasting FM7's handling into the next Horizon would be a step in the right direction. Though I definitely want proper simulation of Hybrid/KERS/DRS systems added. Forza doesn't handle those systems well, as they are pretty much in Full Boost mode 100% of the time.

 

[Codemastersk]

Hm weird. I played all Forza games and F7 is my favourite. Such so many improvements here and there. Constantly evolving with every new game some details better in Horizon and/or Motorsport.



Horizon series is made by Playground Games... Regarding engine: Afaik Forza games use their own in house Forza Tech called engine that gets further developed with every new graphics tech to always be up to date.

I find quite funny people complaining about the mod system on 7 which are just challenge based but forget that 6 had it too and it was way worse (mods which could add grip, horsepower and much more) and the game throws card mods all the time so it is very hard to ignore them unlike on 7. My issues with the game is that it started badly with consumable VIP, the lighting system was not well thought out and the first DLCs were not good, with a lot of SUVs. Except for the lighting system, all of the issues I mentioned were fixed later.

 

[r_outsider]

I find quite funny people complaining about the mod system on 7 which are just challenge based but forget that 6 had it too and it was way worse (mods which could add grip, horsepower and much more) and the game throws card mods all the time so it is very hard to ignore them unlike on 7. My issues with the game is that it started badly with consumable VIP, the lighting system was not well thought out and the first DLCs were not good, with a lot of SUVs. Except for the lighting system, all of the issues I mentioned were fixed later.

Sure would like to race at Sonoma on a nice sunny day...once.

 

[Zeitoss]

My issues with Forza 7 are a long list:

- Lack of tyre compound, and therefore of any race strategy.
- Poor implementation of suspension and tires physics.
- Wrong overall lighting system.
- Missing selection of different time and weather conditions. Weather is only selectable by dry/rain, and for few tracks.
- Complete recycle of graphical assets from previous titles, and lack in visual accuracy representing the tracks details of the different real circuits.
- FOV in cockpit cam missing.
- Sounds for most of the cars completely off, and poor if compared with other racing titles.
- Lost emphasis on motorsport, with complete neglection of the title.

In a nutshell, a game made to impress on quantity, but falling short very quickly on quality.

I hope with the next Forza, Turn10 will adopt the opposite approach (quality and attention to detail first, quantity second).

 

[Ak1504]

lack in visual accuracy representing the tracks details of the different real circuits

? How should that be possible with laserscanning lol

Having all the objects in the data point cloud with their exact measurements and positions which results in exact recreations of the track and also less dev time for 3D artists, are just 2 of many benefits why Turn10 uses laserscan tech and its explained detailed in this video:

Btw: That reminds me of: Beeing 9 years into simracing and "their userbases" it happend very often that people think they can see/measure with their eyeballs, inaccuracy/differences of couple degrees of corners and also elevation even if the used laserscan data is the same for that one track in 3 simulations... And lots of them do not even use the same FoV in different sims or drive with realistic wheel settings lol...

 

[Scaff]

ETS2 also has a large mod community behind it to constantly keep it fresh that I assume, SCS fully appreciates & supports. That community makes it easy to keep the game's life-support going strong when it can consistently add in trucks, trailers, real world companies, AI/Sound/Physics changes or literally new countries. I think SMS also add in their own updates/content even to date.

It's got a large mod community, but the devs are also regularly pushing out paid DLC as well (expanding the map areas) across two titles.

ETS2 is kind of in a different market in that regard, as the core game is almost designed to be sold cheap (I would imagine as a loss-leader) to get people in for the mods and the paid DLC, its a model that still to this day makes it the most popular driving title on Steam.

However even without paid DLC the draw of a title that's a mod platform shouldn't be ignored, Assetto Corsa has sold 12 million copies brought in revenue of over 66 million euros, and let be honest most of that is off the back of people buying it to be able to mod the hell out of it on PC!

? How should that be possible with laserscanning lol

Having all the objects in the data point cloud with their exact measurements and positions which results in exact recreations of the track and also less dev time for 3D artists, are just 2 of many benefits why Turn10 uses laserscan tech and its explained detailed in this video:



Btw: That reminds me of: Beeing 9 years into simracing and "their userbases" it happend very often that people think they can see/measure with their eyeballs, inaccuracy/differences of couple degrees of corners and also elevation even if the used laserscan data is the same for that one track in 3 simulations... And lots of them do not even use the same FoV in different sims or drive with realistic wheel settings lol...

Laserscan itself doesn't mean you will always have 100% accurate tracks. As it depends on how much of the detail of that scan you use, say a scan is accurate to 10mm, a dev doesn't, and in balancing system resource might not, use that level of fidelity. Which can then result in a laser-scanned track that's not quite right in some areas.

One example for this is the 'ring. devs can no longer scan it themselves, but rather they buy the scan data from the company that owns the 'ring. So everyone is now using the exact same data for the track, yet we still have some quite different takes on the 'ring.

It also depends on what is considered 'wrong' visually, so was the track and the surroundings scanned, or was the track laser scanned, but the rest built from photo's, etc. Which can once again result is very different visual feels to the track and its environment.

What I do 100% agree with you on is when people throw up video comparisons to 'title x' and claim its wrong when the FOV is wildly different between the two, with the real ones almost always filmed on a wide angle Go-Pro. You can see this in the video below. While I was able to correct (mostly) the camera angle in the AC footage to match my real life drive, I wasn't able to do so in AMS. Which makes the AMS track look 'wrong', in reality both the AC and AMS versions of Thruxton are damn accurate.

 

[th3o]

After FM 5,6 and 7 i do not have high hopes for this new entry as far as the balance between arcade and simulation goes, but if they can surprise me, i'd definitely take it.
Gran Turismo and Forza games have always kind of been my dream games as far as the concept goes. But because they have been too arcadey driving wise i always kept coming back to more serious sims, which on the other hand lack the content of those big two series.

 

[Ak1504]

@Scaff I can only really recommend to watch the video i posted

 

[Zeitoss]

? How should that be possible with laserscanning lol

Having all the objects in the data point cloud with their exact measurements and positions which results in exact recreations of the track and also less dev time for 3D artists, are just 2 of many benefits why Turn10 uses laserscan tech and its explained detailed in this video:

Btw: That reminds me of: Beeing 9 years into simracing and "their userbases" it happend very often that people think they can see/measure with their eyeballs, inaccuracy/differences of couple degrees of corners and also elevation even if the used laserscan data is the same for that one track in 3 simulations... And lots of them do not even use the same FoV in different sims or drive with realistic wheel settings lol...

The stuff you are posting is good stuff for PR, or for people who tend to believe eberything.

The reality is a bit different, and is enough to load Btands Hatch or Barcelona tracks to easily notice that in most of the turns, T10 did not use the real tracks details. For example, they did not model each track specific curbs, but they decided to use a preset of curbs which are incidentally (oh really?) used in most of the tracks.

These are just two shining examples for tracks which I know wxtremely well in reality, and I know for sure that they never had these curbs at any time over the past ten years.

Then is also enough to load any other racing sim which has these tracks to make a proper evaluation (and all the other titles are very matching between themselves).

This makes you happy anyway? Good for you.
But for me is the typical example of quantity over quality.

 

[th3o]

I dont believe any of the stuff Turn 10 says how great or detailed whatever physics will be. They also said about past Forza games how great they will feel with a wheel, even working with Fanatec together etc. Feeling turned out bad as we all know. So i wait until i get my hands on it or i read from independent reviewers.

 

[ImaRobot]

I dont believe any of the stuff Turn 10 says how great or detailed whatever physics will be. They also said about past Forza games how great they will feel with a wheel, even working with Fanatec together etc. Feeling turned out bad as we all know. So i wait until i get my hands on it or i read from independent reviewers.

That's really what you should be doing for any game, especially those that are long-running.

 

[Ak1504]

The reality is a bit different, and is enough to load Btands Hatch or Barcelona tracks to easily notice that in most of the turns, T10 did not use the real tracks details. For example, they did not model each track specific curbs, but they decided to use a preset of curbs which are incidentally (oh really?) used in most of the tracks.

Give me more details of what curbs at what turns you think are wrong. Exact details so i can take a close look.

 

[Zeitoss]

I believe is really arrogant from your side to ask me to collect, compile and show proof of something.
We are not here to serve you, if you fully believe in the stuff you post, good for you.
If you don't believe, if you have doubts, or you think it is worth to actually challenge whatever PR you read, then you can go ahead and spend some time to document yourself.

Anyway, in the spirit of keeping the conversation to a decent level even when should not be deserved, at the following links you can find some videos focusing on Barcelona Catalunya Teack.

Pay attention for example to Turn 7, and then guess which one was the only title completely missing the green painted bank on the left (inner) side of the curb, with the drain channels, and also which one is the only title to have the painted white line detached from the curb.

Not sure if is enough for you, but for me is a proper example of a game that cannot claim full adherence to reality, favors quantity over reality, and recycling of content over different versions.
I purposely linked videos from Forza 4, 5, 6 and 7 to show how the track details in this case (but also in many other cases) have remained substantially unchanged. In the face of photogrammetry and accuracy.

Real (close up view):
https://www.racefans.net/cata-turn-7-8-wurth/

Real (camera car):


Assetto Corsa (not using track mods):


Project Cars 2:


iRacing:


GT Sport:


F1 2019:
https://youtu.be/DhJF6rFWS1Y

Forza 4:
https://youtu.be/ychDL_IC_G0

Forza 5:
https://youtu.be/BTr5ZrsQmGQ

Forza 6:
https://youtu.be/0Y_Rf61fRC0

Forza 7:
https://youtu.be/nEqVFjPFd4I

 

[McLaren]

I believe is really arrogant from your side to ask me to collect, compile and show proof of something.
We are not here to serve you, if you fully believe in the stuff you post, good for you.
If you don't believe, if you have doubts, or you think it is worth to actually challenge whatever PR you read, then you can go ahead and spend some time to document yourself.

Anyway, in the spirit of keeping the conversation to a decent level even when should not be deserved, at the following links you can find some videos focusing on Barcelona Catalunya Teack.

First off, that's exact how debate works. You made the claim, it's your job to support the claim. Not tell others, "Don't believe, look it up yourself". Worse yet is this attitude to act like asking you for specifics on what you're claiming is some major offense. All he did was ask what turns the issues are on, so he can take a look. He fully gives the indication to "go ahead and spend some time documenting himself".

Secondly, yeah, T10 has omitted it. If you notice since FM5, they've added cones that seem to align with the green section beyond the curbing. I can only assume the decision may have been made to avoid corner cutting in multiplayer, which is a reason T10 added tire barriers to many tracks in FM7 that don't exist in real life to prevent people from trying it. It's an odd decision & would probably be better tackled by making any attempts to blatantly cut corners be hit with an instant slow down.

 

[Zeitoss]

A normal debate should not start with the attitude "How that will be possible with laserscanning lol?", when the reality is there just to be seen by everyone who played the game paying some attention.

You just said they omitted the detail, so is a fact and not a claim.

Whatever they added or not added, this is not an accurate representation of the track, regardless of the many reasons or excuses we can make up.

And no, job is something else.

 

[McLaren]

A normal debate should not start with the attitude "How that will be possible with laserscanning lol?", when the reality is there just to be seen by everyone who played the game paying some attention.

It doesn't validate your decision to act like he insulted your mother. He literally asked for you to give specific details and that he would take a look. You weren't asked to present visual evidence, you fully did on that on your own.

You're talking about a literal curbside detail that most people don't pay any attention to. I have tons of hours into FM7 alone, some green curbside material on Turn 7 of Catalunya is not something I would ever pay attention to.

You just said they omitted the detail, so is a fact and not a claim.

Because you presented the evidence. I'm not wasting my time studying each rumble strip based on your initial, broad description of the issue.

Whatever they added or not added, this is not an accurate representation of the track, regardless of the many reasons or excuses we can make up.

Because there's some missing green material next to a rumble strip, it's not an accurate representation?

BRB, heading back in time to the GT section to argue about trees.

And no, job is something else.

Nope. That's how this site works; make the claim, back it up. Don't want to do that, don't bother getting mad getting called out.

 

[inCloud]

But for me is the typical example of quantity over quality.

I think this level of detail is totally Ok for god damn simcade. I can get when someone dont like pre-laser scan models like gtr r32, but this... Dont like to tell this, but go play proper simulators. Speakers like you are the main reason we get GTS and FM5 with 1/5 of content that their predecessors have, which is main selling point of this games.

 

[Zeitoss]

I think this level of detail is totally Ok for god damn simcade. I can get when someone dont like pre-laser scan models like gtr r32, but this... Dont like to tell this, but go play proper simulators. Speakers like you are the main reason we get GTS and FM5 with 1/5 of content that their predecessors have, which is main selling point of this games.

You are not entitled to tell me what I have to say or to do, unless the forum regulations allow you to do so.
In this case please show me the details of the regulations, so I can have a look.

The discussion is derailing to a point where users cannot legitemely and politely express their opinions and state facts (because how irrititating these can be for someone, facts remain) without other users attacking them or telling them what can be said or what cannot be said.

Instead of talking about a game, about its pros and cons, about what is working and what could be improved, users prefer to go to the personal level and talk about other users and what they should or shouldn't do.

This is embarassing.
I hope this forum can be better than this.

 

[inCloud]

You are not entitled to tell me what I have to say or to do

Take it as a suggestion, not order

You can tell what you want, I even support some of you suggestions about general gameplay. But this position where you opposing quantity and quality leading us to the games that dont have what I love about Forza and GT(:censored:ton of content). Thats why I suggesting you to go play games that have proper track layouts.

 

[Zeitoss]

It doesn't validate your decision to act like he insulted your mother

Very poor analogy. Doesn't make your point stronger, and it is completely unrelated with my reply to the other user.

Because there's some missing green material next to a rumble strip, it's not an accurate representation?

If for you is accurate, I am happy for you. Everyone has (may have?) different ideas of accuracy.

Nope. That's how this site works; make the claim, back it up

Maybe the claim is that the game is visually accurate just because ''it has laserscanning''?
Should we ask to prove this claim as well, then?

 

[McLaren]

Very poor analogy. Doesn't make your point stronger, and it is completely unrelated with my reply to the other user.

Just as it was related to tell someone they don't deserve the decency of a reply? Hush.

politely express their opinions and state facts (because how irrititating these can be for someone, facts remain) without other users attacking them or telling them what can be said or what cannot be said.

Instead of talking about a game, about its pros and cons, about what is working and what could be improved, users prefer to go to the personal level and talk about other users and what they should or shouldn't do.

This is embarassing.
I hope this forum can be better than this.

I believe is really arrogant from your side to ask me to collect, compile and show proof of something.
We are not here to serve you, if you fully believe in the stuff you post, good for you.
----
Anyway, in the spirit of keeping the conversation to a decent level even when should not be deserved,

All someone did is ask you to provide more specifics on the tracks you have issues with, and this is how you responded.

You don't get to cry victim and question forum demeanor & then state someone doesn't deserve a decent level of response.

You copped the attitude, first by getting offended of being questioned.

Maybe the claim is that the game is visually accurate just because ''it has laserscanning''?
Should we ask to prove this claim as well, then?

He literally did. He made the claim it was laser scanned and then provided his evidence. You dismissed it as PR talk but want to refuse the same level of effort to back up your counter-point.

? How should that be possible with laserscanning lol

Having all the objects in the data point cloud with their exact measurements and positions which results in exact recreations of the track and also less dev time for 3D artists, are just 2 of many benefits why Turn10 uses laserscan tech and its explained detailed in this video:

Btw: That reminds me of: Beeing 9 years into simracing and "their userbases" it happend very often that people think they can see/measure with their eyeballs, inaccuracy/differences of couple degrees of corners and also elevation even if the used laserscan data is the same for that one track in 3 simulations... And lots of them do not even use the same FoV in different sims or drive with realistic wheel settings lol...

 

[Zeitoss]

Just as it was related to tell someone they don't deserve the decency of a reply?

Still not related.

All someone did is ask you to provide more specifics on the tracks you have issues with, and this is how you responded.

Providing all the specifics he was not aware about. amazing, eh?

You don't get to cry victim and question forum demeanor & then state someone doesn't deserve a decent level of response.

My level of response was to provide all necessary details. True fact.

He literally did. He made the claim it was laser scanned and then provided his evidence. You dismissed it as PR talk but want to refuse the same level of effort to back up your counter-point.

His claim of being laserscanned was to dismiss the lack of visual accuracy. And he was truly and deeply passionate about his theory, so much to be derisive.
It was already replied to him, explaining that being laserscanned does NOT necessarily imply 100% visual accuracy.

Being laserscanned is not an evidence of visual accuracy. So, visual accuracy still remains a claim to be proven.
But if you want to go on, please go on.

You copped the attitude, first by getting offended of being questioned.

False, not reflecting the sequence of the posts.

 

[McLaren]

Still not related.

Exactly. Just as your passive aggressiveness & claiming it's not your duty to provide proof. He never asked you to provide proof, just turn specifics.

Providing all the specifics he was not aware about. amazing, eh?

The reality is a bit different, and is enough to load Btands Hatch or Barcelona tracks to easily notice that in most of the turns, T10 did not use the real tracks details. For example, they did not model each track specific curbs, but they decided to use a preset of curbs which are incidentally (oh really?) used in most of the tracks.

You named 2 tracks, and just said most of the turns. He went on to ask you to be more specific.

Give me more details of what curbs at what turns you think are wrong. Exact details so i can take a close look.

My level of response was to provide all necessary details. True fact.

Except you went into acting offended when asked to be more specific on those details.

His claim of being laserscanned was to dismiss the lack of visual accuracy. And he was truly and deeply passionate about his theory, so much to be derisive.
It was already replied to him, explaining that being laserscanned does NOT necessarily imply 100% visual accuracy.

Being laserscanned is not an evidence of visual accuracy. So, visual accuracy still remains a claim to be proven.
But if you want to go on, please go on.

By Scaff, who did it in a polite manner? Who was responded to, to watch the video which Scaff ended up liking the post?

None of this dismisses the fact that you said his post was PR talk & provided 2 tracks that had issues, to which he asked you to be more specific on the turns on those tracks so "he can take a close look", to which you acted offended that he had the audacity to ask such a thing.

Revert back to the simple, overlooked detail of your reply that he never asked you to "collect, compile and show proof of something". All you had to do was simply reply, "Catalunya, Turn 7" and he would've looked into it for himself.

False, not reflecting the sequence of the posts.

Nope. Regardless of his "lol", debate on this forum doesn't work this way:

I believe is really arrogant from your side to ask me to collect, compile and show proof of something.
We are not here to serve you, if you fully believe in the stuff you post, good for you.
If you don't believe, if you have doubts, or you think it is worth to actually challenge whatever PR you read, then you can go ahead and spend some time to document yourself.

Anyway, in the spirit of keeping the conversation to a decent level even when should not be deserved, at the following links you can find some videos focusing on Barcelona Catalunya Teack.

It is not arrogant to ask someone to be more specific on their claim. It is your duty to "serve" him because you are the one making the claim. The user said he would take a close look himself. Adding on that you're one the doing some sort of favor to keep the "conversation decent" when it's "not deserved" is ridiculously exaggerated when one (once more) sees you were simply asked to provide more specific, exact details for said user to look into themselves.

That is the only reason I jumped in. Because you decided to act like being questioned is beneath your level of discussion & attempting to act as if he or I is the one attacking you, when you're the one who wanted to completely dismiss the other user as being unworthy of a response in the first place. You want the forum to be better, but adopt the idea it's not your duty to support your own argument.

There is no "go on", necessary.

 

[Nacho Libre]

Beyond all the "tech" and "realism" talk, what I really want to know is what is the focus of the game, specifically the solo campaign, if any. Will we get a new and fresh approach? Will it have a narrative?

Because frankly, the car collector mode of years past is quite stale, but I also don't want all the emphasis to go to multiplayer (like GT Sport).

Frankly, in spite of its rather poor polish, PC3 covers much of what I'm currently looking for in a sim(cade) racer, specially the feel of the cars and the controller, and the daily/weekly/monthly contest format, which is better than the current Forzathon mode.

I would be happy if FM is the game that balances the solo mode (with new and appealing game modes) with its multiplayer mode in a polished package that tilts towards the realism side of things but without ignoring casual fun completely.

 

[Scaff]

You are not entitled to tell me what I have to say or to do, unless the forum regulations allow you to do so.
In this case please show me the details of the regulations, so I can have a look.

The discussion is derailing to a point where users cannot legitemely and politely express their opinions and state facts (because how irrititating these can be for someone, facts remain) without other users attacking them or telling them what can be said or what cannot be said.

Instead of talking about a game, about its pros and cons, about what is working and what could be improved, users prefer to go to the personal level and talk about other users and what they should or shouldn't do.

Let be make this 100% clear, here at GT Planet if you make a claim then it's up to you to support that claim.

It's a basic rule of debate and 'look for it yourself' or acting as if it's a personal attack to be asked to back up your claims are simply not acceptable responses.

This is embarassing.
I hope this forum can be better than this.

It's not up to the forum to change to meet your expectations, quite the opposite.

You made the claim, it's on you to support it.

 

[merseyxshore]

I believe is really arrogant from your side to ask me to collect, compile and show proof of something.
We are not here to serve you, if you fully believe in the stuff you post, good for you.
If you don't believe, if you have doubts, or you think it is worth to actually challenge whatever PR you read, then you can go ahead and spend some time to document yourself.

Anyway, in the spirit of keeping the conversation to a decent level even when should not be deserved, at the following links you can find some videos focusing on Barcelona Catalunya Teack.

Pay attention for example to Turn 7, and then guess which one was the only title completely missing the green painted bank on the left (inner) side of the curb, with the drain channels, and also which one is the only title to have the painted white line detached from the curb.

Not sure if is enough for you, but for me is a proper example of a game that cannot claim full adherence to reality, favors quantity over reality, and recycling of content over different versions.
I purposely linked videos from Forza 4, 5, 6 and 7 to show how the track details in this case (but also in many other cases) have remained substantially unchanged. In the face of photogrammetry and accuracy.

Real (close up view):
https://www.racefans.net/cata-turn-7-8-wurth/

Real (camera car):


Assetto Corsa (not using track mods):


Project Cars 2:


iRacing:


GT Sport:


F1 2019:
https://youtu.be/DhJF6rFWS1Y

Forza 4:
https://youtu.be/ychDL_IC_G0

Forza 5:
https://youtu.be/BTr5ZrsQmGQ

Forza 6:
https://youtu.be/0Y_Rf61fRC0

Forza 7:
https://youtu.be/nEqVFjPFd4I

I kinda feel like this is the sim racing version of the Navy Seal Copypasta

 

[Zeitoss]

Nope. Regardless of his "lol", debate on this forum doesn't work this way:
.

What you disregard is arbitrary for what you want to prove.
The lol is there, regardless or not.

And again, you jumped in because I acted like he or you is the one attacking me.

If you did not jump in, how could I acted like you are attacking me?

Again, you a bit confused on the sequence of events.

That's why I tell you to go on. With your own story.

Let be make this 100% clear, here at GT Planet if you make a claim then it's up to you to support that claim.

It's a basic rule of debate and 'look for it yourself' or acting as if it's a personal attack to be asked to back up your claims are simply not acceptable responses.



It's not up to the forum to change to meet your expectations, quite the opposite.

You made the claim, it's on you to support it.

Sure Scaff, but then this should be valid from all sides, correct?

Or is it just arbitrary?

Because to me, the claim could also be dismissing the lack of visual accuracy with a general sentence about laserscanning, and bringing up to the discussion just a general video about laserscanning?

Does this prove the visual accuracy?

And if regards of my last quoted sentence, this was a specific consideration about the "suggestion" to play only certain games, or to avoid commenting certain parts of a game.

 

[Scaff]

.
Sure Scaff, but then this should be valid from all sides, correct?

Or is it just arbitrary?
.

It applies to all members, and its not a debate or discussion, its an instruction.

 

[McLaren]

Again, you a bit confused on the sequence of events.

A member asked you to give more specific details/what turns on the tracks you brought up, so he could look for himself. Your response was to tell him it's not your job to provide proof and it almost wasn't worth a response despite the fact he never asked for evidence, just simple clarification. There is no confusion, that's literally how you reacted....