Opinions on Assetto Corsa Physics (1.4)

[Lazza]

Thanks for listing his work, since you do know. But I also know that PRC shared Pleclair's converted ac to rf2 nordschleife link. Which means Pleclair had to upload the converted track to a hosting website, and then share the link. And you want people to give him gratitude? You can of course give him gratitude for his past work, hexagramme, since you know his work, but you're also giving him gratitude for his recent actions?

Is he?

 

[Minibull]

I've loaded the track in editor. It didn't use the full mesh, he either failed to understand that AC uses separate mesh for physics and graphics, or he wasn't able to convert the physics mesh to rF2 (AC physics mesh vertices are placed asymmetric which probably doesn't work with rF2 as it uses same mesh for graphics and physics). AC Nords physics mesh is more precise (in terms of resolution) than anything I've seen in rF2.

Doesn't rF2 still use an additional physical mesh too? For all the small micro stuff.

 

[Guimengo]

I've loaded the track in editor. It didn't use the full mesh, he either failed to understand that AC uses separate mesh for physics and graphics, or he wasn't able to convert the physics mesh to rF2 (AC physics mesh vertices are placed asymmetric which probably doesn't work with rF2 as it uses same mesh for graphics and physics). AC Nords physics mesh is more precise (in terms of resolution) than anything I've seen in rF2.

I clearly recall him writing something exactly about the separate mesh like a realization, or epiphany. The asymmetric nature threw me off when I was following it. I plead ignorance about the rest since it's outside my knowledge realm.


(I know the post was not directed at me but I could chip in for the first part)

 

[Associat0r]

(AC physics mesh vertices are placed asymmetric which probably doesn't work with rF2 as it uses same mesh for graphics and physics).

rF2 can handle those TIN meshes just fine. isiMotor also supports separate graphics from physics meshes since before rF1.

 

[stonec]

Yeah I could be wrong about isiMotor not supporting those type of meshes, but ISI tracks don't use them either way. This is the kind of physics mesh used by latest AC track. To compare with, this is from rF2 Silverstone.

 

[Associat0r]

but ISI tracks don't use it either way.

Of course ISI tracks don't use TIN meshes, since they obviously don't derive their meshes from point cloud data. But as I said before, rF2 supports TIN meshes just fine.

 

[Minibull]

Yeah I could be wrong about isiMotor not supporting those type of meshes, but ISI tracks don't use them either way. This is the kind of physics mesh used by latest AC track. To compare with, this is from rF2 Silverstone.

Yeah, and with the underlying "invisible" mesh too. Impossible to render such fine meshes on our hardware. AC are choosing to use a TIN mesh for the render, vs quads in rF2?
Pretty sure they both would be able to work with either.

The one thing that could crop up with a super fine physics mesh is just the way the engine can't actually use it. Depending on how "fast" the core is running, it won't be able to make use of each track point while driving over it.