Opinions on Assetto Corsa Physics (1.4)

John said:
It's only thievery if he releases it - a private conversion is just that - a private conversion.

Oh, and if that "bozo" hadn't put in the hundreds of hours - there would be NO Ring (the existing and legal Com8 conversion) in RF2 at all.
Click to expand...

He has already shared it to others.
There would be "NO" ring? Are you sure about that?
 
stonec said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLAgf2_aMfM

This track looks almost as good in rF2 as in AC, which is impressive considering it's not built for gMotor engine. I would say it's strong evidence that the graphics engine itself doesn't lose much to competitors (except those special effects...). It's mostly about the track textures and what color palette the artist chooses that makes the difference.
Click to expand...
If you read my post it's exactly what bothers me with rF2.

On the other hand the lightning, shading, smoke, shadows and similar effects are a bit behind the competition especially when you consider graphics/performance ratio.
 
Golanv said:
He has already shared it to others.
There would be "NO" ring? Are you sure about that?
Click to expand...

Do you really think anyone else would have started that project, and gotten it to the extent that pleclair (that "bozo" as you call him) did?
 
Golanv said:
I wouldn't go as far as they "suck". Come on, there is a lot of things right there that make it very enjoyable, entertaining, fun and immersive rally sim. I mean it wouldn't be those things without realism thrown in there.

ps. There's a hilarious quote from AC forums that I have to show you... made me crack up! ;)

- From Theboss to Michael Hornbuckle

You are infamous my little Aussie friend!
Click to expand...


What is so funny ..... lol

That more then not people take me literally, when I talk figuratively

Better then always talking metaphorically, making comparisons then stating two things which are very different actually have things in common. :p


Sorry nothing is common to ISI physics for me and you can take that any way you like. ;)

As far as suck goes, having no F3 update in 4 years sucks, having 3 cars /colours, gaps in rims, bad windscreen sucks ( thank heavens for community team ) lool
Having road wear linked to drying line sucks, no HDR night sucks, some session settings being fixed between tracks sucks, not having the Historic tracks after 4 years sucks, it sucks when the Ai do something silly out of the blue.

So rF2 can suck too... literally.

But does any of it bother me ? ;)

-------------------

spam :p

I do not know why I get such a hard time only thing I ever said about AC, pCars and Dirt are nice ? lol

I always said of all those tiles ..... " great visual sensory audio immersion and ambiance, models, layouts, UI's, etc. etc. "

Dirt I called the best rally experience to date.

Just because I think they all fall down a little in physics which in it's essence is more important to me should be irrelevant to anyone else.

;)
 
Last edited:
Just thought I'd mention this because of the talk about rFpro a page back:

www.rfactor-pro.com said:
The rFpro product was the outcome of a major development partnership with a high budget F1 team in 2007, to create a simulator that was physically accurate, and visually and aurally realistic. By licensing and extending the graphics engine from the computer game rFactor, we benefit from the continuous and intense R&D effort invested at the pace demanded by the gaming industry. rFpro builds are released on a fast development cycle, two per year, so we are able to take advantage of new features as they become available.
Click to expand...
Source: http://www.rfactor-pro.com/about.aspx
 
http://imagespaceinc.com/software.php
isiMotor2 became the software engine used by most of the Grand Prix grid when various advancements and a further opened architecture led to rFactor Pro. This product, which continues to evolve, has become the leading software solution for racing teams and automotive manufacturers.

Taking what was learned from isiMotor2 and rFactor Pro, ISI began development of rFactor2, a huge step forward in the simulation of track, tire, weather and physics, with a newly improved graphics engine.
Click to expand...

http://www.planetmarrs.net/rfactor-full-steam-ahead
ISI released rFactor 2, an evolution of the original version. It contained a lot of code that had been developed as part of rFactor Pro, a version of the simulation that is sold to professional racing and Grand Prix teams, backported into the new “consumer” version. It enhanced the original with a more sophisticated tire and physics model and features like variable weather and a “real road” track surface that changes over the course of a race and really takes into account where cars drive instead of relying on some pre-defined “ideal line”.
Click to expand...

http://steamcommunity.com//app/339790/discussions/0/610573751160274820/#c610574106424826109
there are also other racing teams using rFactor, NOT the pro version, for serious simulation and as long as the models that you put in the simulation are correct it is very accurate. Accurate enough for those teams to try out different setups and parts in the simulator before trying them on the real car.
Click to expand...

See more here https://community.racesimcentral.ne...-Physics-(1-4)?p=410407&viewfull=1#post410407
and here https://community.racesimcentral.ne...-Physics-(1-4)?p=410438&viewfull=1#post410438
 
Last edited:
 
Golanv said:
That's just classic thievery. I do hope that someone makes an example of this bozo. It's not like we are swimming in laser scanned content in our niche genre that we would afford to lose devs and their licencing partners.
Click to expand...
Could not agree more! Tim has stated in these very forums if people want laser scanned tracks, buy the sim it's from. I see on a forum member's FB page, AC's Spa has been converted too 8(

As for AC's physics, they aren't as 'thorough' as rFactor 2 however AC isn't without merit. In the end, it's up to the end user to run whatever suits them best.
 
WhiteShadow said:
Now we all know that you feel that rFactor2 is great game and so do me and many others too. Could you now give us your Opinion on Assetto Corsa Physics (1.4). Please try to do that without pasting 1000 links. Thak you :)
Click to expand...
It's his right to reply to others wether you like him or not.
 
Maug said:
It's his right to reply to others wether you like him or not.
Click to expand...

Thread is: Opinions on Assetto Corsa Physics (1.4). I like to get his opinion about that not bunch of links about rFactor2 and rFactor Pro as reply. Has nothing to do if I like him or not and if I don`t I put him in my ignore list.
I simply like to hear hes opinion about AC. :)
 
Travis said:
Could not agree more! Tim has stated in these very forums if people want laser scanned tracks, buy the sim it's from. I see on a forum member's FB page, AC's Spa has been converted too 8(

As for AC's physics, they aren't as 'thorough' as rFactor 2 however AC isn't without merit. In the end, it's up to the end user to run whatever suits them best.
Click to expand...
And I see isi tracks, 3pa Bathurst for example in AC. No matter what anyone feels its never going to stop happening, and apologies if you are not referring to my page but if you are, I know nothing about the laser scanned Spa, just screenshots have been shared on there. Personally I would love to only post permission only / scratch tracks but it would be a very slow page :)
 
So you are saying that "I would remove the illegal content on my site, but it would hinder my social media hobby."!? Let it be a "very slow page" you git. :rolleyes:

When Sector3 (then SimBin) took the big hammer out about their content being converted, **** got serious. Maybe that's what is needed from other devs as well.
 
Git is not nice. Tbh I try not to post illegal content, however a track like Oulton Park for example... Updated to rf2 from some obsolete toca game from donkeys years ago, yes its illegal, its from codies but come on ! Right at this moment in time I'm chasing 2 original authors to gain permissions for 2 tracks desperately missed in rf2 that are ready to release and updated to rf2 specs in every way. When I get called a Git for the work I put in, it makes me feel like closing the page and walking away, it takes 2 clicks to do it..... Just become a rf2 user and hope for the best regards modding and content like many others.
 
Please don´t close it!
I like your work and your page (and many others too!)!
Thankfully not all users are modpolice-officers.
 
PRC Steve said:
Git is not nice. Tbh I try not to post illegal content, however a track like Oulton Park for example... Updated to rf2 from some obsolete toca game from donkeys years ago, yes its illegal, its from codies but come on ! Right at this moment in time I'm chasing 2 original authors to gain permissions for 2 tracks desperately missed in rf2 that are ready to release and updated to rf2 specs in every way. When I get called a Git for the work I put in, it makes me feel like closing the page and walking away, it takes 2 clicks to do it..... Just become a rf2 user and hope for the best regards modding and content like many others.
Click to expand...

Don't bother with guys like him mate... they also use this stuff after all doesn't matter how much they deny it
 
Golanv said:
So you are saying that "I would remove the illegal content on my site, but it would hinder my social media hobby."!? Let it be a "very slow page" you git. :rolleyes:

When Sector3 (then SimBin) took the big hammer out about their content being converted, **** got serious. Maybe that's what is needed from other devs as well.
Click to expand...


It is his page on FB, not connected to rF2 and he doesn't post anything about the material here. Any dev or modder has an issue, and contacts him, it gets taken down. I have seen it before.
 
Considering how Niche sim racing market is for anything above the realism of Forza or Gran Turismo series, I would rather try to protect it, than exploit it. Each game that is being considered in the category of racing/driving simulator by you folks, is being made by a small development group. ISI, Reiza, Kunos, Sector3... all these devs sales put together do not reach the market share of one single popular games weekly sales, that's how tiny a market we are talking about.
Why would you want to potentially damage the core that your own hobby stands on?

Take Indianapolis and ISI for example: How many hours went into making that track, how many dollars does that come down to, how many people end up using that track?
Now an average pc user with some knowledge of 3DS max can take that work, convert it into any game from the previously mentioned developers, and share the end result, and all those dollars and hours spent for free.
End user will get a kick out of it, "free stuff" right? How does that affect the developer? Are they encouraged to make more expensive, more time consuming, more in depth projects, or just end up out sourcing the work to these hobbyists and pay for the licence if the result is "ok" enough.
It would be very nice to hear how that actually affects the product that has been stolen from, but I doubt there is actual data about this matter for racing sims. Who would study such a thing concerning this minor virtual entity of sim racing.

As a fan of their labor, I personally try to keep myself in 'scratch made content' only, and if there is a track in rF2 that doesn't exist in Assetto Corsa, then I drive it in rF2.
Either you are for or against theft of intellectual property. Simple as that.
Again Personally, I cannot tolerate any distribution of stolen content that might ruin even a moment of my favorite hobby devs day. The thought of this fragile field of independent devs having to go back to using unlicenced "fantasy" content because people do not know how to appreciate what they have, just pisses me off. Hence, you distribute or advertise such endeavours, you get called a git.

http://www.wipo.int/wipo_magazine/en/2014/02/article_0002.html
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/3546/hey_thats_my_game_intellectual_.php?print=1
 
Last edited:
I get where you're coming from Golanv, but I don't agree.

Essentially what you're saying is you buy a music album, but you can't play it in public, because it is the work of the original artist.

I have bought all the sims available on the market, therefore surely I can use them how I like. If the games were free, I could maybe understand a bit more, but I have paid money for a product, and it is now my product to do what I like with.

I funny understand the sensitivities of posting ripped content on an official forum. That is foolish. Also selling content again is morally wrong.

But there is no crime in editing or changing something which you have bought, provided you don't start trying to sell it.

Also Facebook and the associated groups are private, or should be. If you don't like it, you don't have to be part of the group.

Christ, I've modified my car in real life, I don't expect Toyota to stop making cars because I have changed their 'original' work.
 
All right, unless the artist forbid the partial use and/or modification of his work. I think it's in their right to do so.
 
You may have your views and are entitled to them Golanv but name calling is nothing more than childish and low, no need for it whatsoever...
 
dylbie said:
I get where you're coming from Golanv, but I don't agree.

Essentially what you're saying is you buy a music album, but you can't play it in public, because it is the work of the original artist.

I have bought all the sims available on the market, therefore surely I can use them how I like. If the games were free, I could maybe understand a bit more, but I have paid money for a product, and it is now my product to do what I like with.

I funny understand the sensitivities of posting ripped content on an official forum. That is foolish. Also selling content again is morally wrong.

But there is no crime in editing or changing something which you have bought, provided you don't start trying to sell it.

Also Facebook and the associated groups are private, or should be. If you don't like it, you don't have to be part of the group.

Christ, I've modified my car in real life, I don't expect Toyota to stop making cars because I have changed their 'original' work.
Click to expand...

I think you need to do some reading before making assumptions of what is fact and what is fiction, especially if you decide to present them as facts rather than your opinions.
http://rfactor.net/web/termsofuse/
 
tjc said:
You may have your views and are entitled to them Golanv but name calling is nothing more than childish and low, no need for it whatsoever...
Click to expand...

Well said. Any discussion dies a quick embarrassing death as soon as people start with the name calling.
It's not a proper way to communicate or get any views across.
 
hexagramme said:
Well said. Any discussion dies a quick embarrassing death as soon as people start with the name calling.
It's not a proper way to communicate or get any views across.
Click to expand...

"Name calling"... Prove me wrong.

git
ɡɪt/
nounBRITISHinformal
an unpleasant or contemptible person.
"that mean old git"


Back to the topic.
Without doing any comparison off franchise, 1.4 physics are almost a linear progression of improvement for Assetto Corsa physics. Fine details in vehicle dynamics are coming through better and better. At the moment, there is a lot of tyre models in play, since it does take so long to update every vehicle with the new model (v.6 I believe), but what seen so far, the tyre model is absolutely fantastic.
I can not remember a time when a sim had this kind of variety of vehicles, and every single one of them was such a joy to drive and learn how they behave.

Potential bugs aside, there is pretty much only one thing I would like to see, when talking about AC driving experience. This is also a reason for many uneducated comments about the sim, and that is the track grip levels.
For example, the best grip setting should never be used if you want to recreate realistic conditions. It has been stated by Kunos that it is a theoretical perfection and obviously things stick to the road like a bad habbit at that point.
If you keep this in mind, and select weather and track surface accordingly, definitely top 3 sim of all time for mere driving pleasure and physics.
Concerning the track grip settings, personally I would like to see more differences between green and lets say dusty track condition. It is really hard to say what it should be when it's called dusty or green per se, especially when the grip level progression while driving is taken in to count, but more defined options at the slippery end of things would be nice.

Other than that, there is not much to say. Business as usual. As many times they have already, Kunos keeps pleasently surpricing yours truly, so I don't see anything but good things in the near future.
 
hexagramme said:
Well said. Any discussion dies a quick embarrassing death as soon as people start with the name calling.
It's not a proper way to communicate or get any views across.
Click to expand...

Cute! Pretending to take the moral high ground. Good luck with that.

Seems you're wasting your time with some of this lot, Golanv. Still, it's been revealing.
 
Last edited:
Back on topic...............


article-0-0585AFF30000044D-991_468x338.jpg





hehehe p
 
Take the F2002, with FFB setting of gain to 100%, curb to 40%, road and slip to 20% (initial assessment, similar to SCE feel) around one of the game's proper tracks. Make sure TC is not just set to 1/5 too.
 
As a sim for me it is worthless as long rf2 is available. I can have a little fun in it yes, for a short time, but that's it.
 
tjc said:
Yes! Is this in game...? :p
Click to expand...

Almost thought so a few times. lol ;)


I can have a little fun in it yes, for a short time, but that's it.
Click to expand...

Yep ;)

The best feeling cars are good but too few and far between.

Many are too similar to drive.
Squirt and point, lift 5% to regain grip back, etc.
Driving GT3's I could easy forget which car I am in.

I can't think of 2 cars in rF2 feel anywhere close to similar.

That is down to physics, nothing else.


==========

Just do my test will ya. :rolleyes: ( asked 10 times not a single person tests or comments

1960s F1 ( no wings) in 3 sims at Historic Monza

At full speed let all 3 under-steer into Variante Ascari.
Then at last moment fight/coax them back to control.

Result: 2 are childsplay 1 is difficult.

That tells me all I need to know about Historic physics thanks very muchly.
 
Mrslfrsl said:
As a sim for me it is worthless as long rf2 is available. I can have a little fun in it yes, for a short time, but that's it.
Click to expand...

I would sign this (for now). They made huge progress and are a beauty for the eyes.

But i focus on simulation, feedback and realism physics wise. Those are fun to drive, but not as realistic as rF is. Even rF1 had more realism. Plus i dont like their input latency which is a lot higher. Anyway catching some powerfull cars and do some laps on their beautiful spa does make a lot of fun. Doing this on something like a monthly base.


rF2 is my swiss army knife for daily work were ac is for beauty like beeing one of ten girlfriends which you met from time to time :D
 
Gonzo said:
rF2 is my swiss army knife for daily work were ac is for beauty like beeing one of ten girlfriends which you met from time to time :D
Click to expand...


I can agree with that !

RF2 tosses up the odd fugly.

img-thing


lol ;)
 
I agree with you all. This video shows AC as simcade or just unrealistic physics. But if both cars and the driving behave so similarly in this video, that would make rf2 simcade as well, am I right?

 
QUF said:
I agree with you all. This video shows AC as simcade or just unrealistic physics. But if both cars and the driving behave so similarly in this video, that would make rf2 simcade as well, am I right?
Click to expand...

It shows nothing about the physics. If the guy would at least be driving on limit instead of cruising, we could perhaps make some weak conclusions. But even then it's just one mod ported from one game to the other, we have no idea if it uses any of the specific rF2 tech (CPM, flexi chassis, etc). Better would be to compare the same original content car in both games and let someone like Spinelli make a video of it who actually drives on the limit.
 
stonec said:
It shows nothing about the physics. If the guy would at least be driving on limit instead of cruising, we could perhaps make some weak conclusions. But even then it's just one mod ported from one game to the other, we have no idea if it uses any of the specific rF2 tech (CPM, flexi chassis, etc). Better would be to compare the same original content car in both games and let someone like Spinelli make a video of it who actually drives on the limit.
Click to expand...
Ok not through a video, but if this video isn't valid, which you'd classify as subjective comparison, why consider so valid the opinions of other guys here who also just rely on their subjective opinion while driving a sim and comparing to another sim they used? That's what is interesting. I see opinions talking about such a disparity between rf2 and AC, and then I show them a video with practically equivalent car behavior, and say it isn't valid, but writing some posts in the forum saying AC isn't good (Mrslfrsl, lamo, DurgeDriven, Gonzo) is valid out of sudden.

Stonec, why didn't you comment before on their opinions, but now when I post this video you need to tell I'm wrong.

Either way, you can tell what you want but I've never seen a comparison video between rf2 x forza/gran turismo look so similar as rf2 x assetto.
 
To which platform has their spa being converted and how is the quality? Codemasters conversions in rf2 looked disappointing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top