So....who has PCars?

Spinelli said:
1. How can a definite angle exist for a given screen size/ratio, game-FOV, and user-distance to screen? In IR, AC, and (I think) LFS you can change the rendering on the outer monitors only - which therefore allows almost any angle you desire - without changing either the screen size/ratio, game-FOV, or user-distance to screen. Therefore, depending on how the outer monitors are rendered, the outer monitor angles can almost be limitless (or at least limitless between 0 degrees and 90 degrees)...
Click to expand...

Unless I'm mistaken, you've just pointed out exactly where rF2 is lacking. In rF2 the side screen angle is determined by the things you've listed, at some point it should be able to cater for your current screen layout. At the moment it very much limits you to a single correct side screen angle, which will be the same as each screen's h-FOV (note the h-horizontal).

What gets drawn in the screens doesn't overlap or leave gaps (otherwise you might manage to fake bezel correction!). So if the centre screen has a h-FOV of 80°, the edge of it is showing you what's at 40° away from centre, and the next screen will start drawing what's above 40° from centre (of the centre screen), across to 80° from centre at the middle of that screen (120° at the far edge). The centre of that screen has to be pointing directly toward you for it to look right, and since it's showing what's 80° off-centre it obviously has to be at a 80° angle, and will be 80° to your side. Then it all works.

When they allow you to specify your screen size and angles, the game will instead adjust the multiview angles to suit your layout and your screens become windows into the game world exactly where they are, instead of needing to be in the correct position for everything to look right.

So back to your question, the angles are currently determined by the h-FOV, which depends on the screen ratio and v-FOV (not directly; horizontal:vertical FOV isn't the same as the screen ratio).
 
Just to everybody who said, pCars is like driving on Rails: take the DTM Group A Mercedes on Hockenheim for some Laps, Assists off, and report ;)
 
Spinelli said:
? I know how bezel correction works. The GPU is basically rendering an extra wide screen that you can't see.

I know that RF2's in-game menus (UI) aren't multiview aware.

I know that ISI know that their U.I. isn't multiview aware and that they don't have all the customizability options that games like LFS (I think), IR, and AC have.

I've said it multiple times and all say it again. All I'm saying is that even with a multiview-unaware U.I. + not the slimmest bezels around, I still am able to see everything in the RF2 U.I. All lines of text, all buttons to click on, etc. So the reality is that the U.I. not being multiview-aware is not actually a problem 99.9% of the time, well, unless someone has massive bezels like 30 or 40 cm wide ones, lol.
Click to expand...

You seem not to be able debate at all. You statements are unreasonable based to no fact how multiview is working and how it looks like, you statements are also hurtful to development of rFactor2 Multiview UI.


Spinelli said:
U.I.?? What's your point? :) Multiview still also works perfect in RF2, RF1, AC, NKP (I think), SCE, FT, ASR, LFS, etc.
Click to expand...

This is my point, one tick box.
View attachment 16755

This is real Multiview UI which works perfect
View attachment 16756

The end, back to topic.
 
Thanks for the explanation Lazza.

WhiteShadow, I don't understand what you're trying to debate/argue/prove. I said it multiple times that I (as well as pretty-much everyone with RF) knows that RF doesn't have the customizability options that LFS (I think), IR and AC have. I know that, and have known it since multiview was first introduced to RF1 in the mid 2000s. I know this. I never said I prefer it. However, if you use a realistic FOV then angle your monitors towards that then the game rendering (actual driving) will look perfect.

With regards to the two pictures. Again, like I said, I know that IR (LFS, and AC) have more customizability options for triple screen users, hence the extra triple screen options. So I don't know what your trying to prove/debate/argue with those 2 pictures.

With regards to the U.I. getting cut off, again, I've said it multiple times, 99.9% of the U.I. is not cut off. No text, no buttons you must click on, nothing. So in reality it isn't actually a problem unless you have humungous bezels. I play around 6000 x 1080 or 59xx x 1080 as well and no part of the U.I.s functionality is cut-off. So in reality, the U.I. is absolutely fine.

It would be nice for further customizability options, of course it would, but with regards to the U.I., nothing gets cut off, the game is fully usable, the U.I. is fully usable, etc.
 
Spinelli said:
Thanks for the explanation Lazza.

WhiteShadow, I don't understand what you're trying to debate/argue/prove. I said it multiple times that I (as well as pretty-much everyone with RF) knows that RF doesn't have the customizability options that LFS (I think), IR and AC have. I know that, and have known it since multiview was first introduced to RF1 in the mid 2000s. I know this. I never said I prefer it. However, if you use a realistic FOV then angle your monitors towards that then the game rendering (actual driving) will look perfect.

With regards to the two pictures. Again, like I said, I know that IR (LFS, and AC) have more customizability options for triple screen users, hence the extra triple screen options. So I don't know what your trying to prove/debate/argue with those 2 pictures.

With regards to the U.I. getting cut off, again, I've said it multiple times, 99.9% of the U.I. is not cut off. No text, no buttons you must click on, nothing. So in reality it isn't actually a problem unless you have humungous bezels. I play around 6000 x 1080 or 59xx x 1080 as well and no part of the U.I.s functionality is cut-off. So in reality, the U.I. is absolutely fine.

It would be nice for further customizability options, of course it would, but with regards to the U.I., nothing gets cut off, the game is fully usable, the U.I. is fully usable, etc.
Click to expand...

Reality is that that as you state. You are using 6000 x 1080 (bezel corrected) you scaling is not right it is about 4-5% wrong. New rFactor2 User Interface is fine but the old one was not, please try to get this in to you head finally.
 
Last edited:
WhiteShadow has large bezels on his Benq monitors so that puts him at a bigger disadvantage. I have an Acer on my desk at work that has a 1mm bezel. When I got this monitor the first thing I thought was, man this would be great for multiview.

I think everyone is on the same page about multiview. It needs more customization. I think what we aren't on the same page about is where the priority should be. For WhiteShadow it is high on his priority list because it sounds like he has parts of the UI blocked.

Okay, we got it. We all have different views. Lets move on I guess.
 
WhiteShadow said:
Reality is that that as you state you are using 6000 x 1080 (bezel corrected) you scaling is not right it is about 4-5% wrong. New rFactor2 User Interface is fine but the old one was not, please try to get this in to you head finally.
Click to expand...
I got it in my mind, and there's no need to talk like that. I know it's not right, I've said it like 20 times that I know it's not right and technically speaking the U.I. could get cut off. I know, I know, I know, lol, I've said it like 10 times. But nothing FUNCTIONAL ends up getting cut off, even before. No text, no buttons, nothing. I use a very similar amount of bezel compensation as you do (about 6000x1080) and , again, nothing in my U.I. was ever cut off (besides 1 or 2 digits of the FPS counter), no text, no buttons in the garage screen, not the options screen, nothing.

I fully agree with you and everyone else that - of course - it would be nice/better to have full triple screen options like IR, AC, etc. I completely agree with you and everyone on that :), don't get me wrong. All I'm saying though is that even with 6000 x 1080 bezel compensation, no part of my game is unusable or hidden, even before UI scaling, even in RF1 5 years ago, etc. and therefore the current setup with limited options still works excellent, it's just that people need to angle their monitors the way their setup requires them too, rather than being able to enter in their angles and have the game change according to that.
 
So just come home from long day, with a formula Renault 2.0...

Loved it. Such an experience!!. So much grip heavy steering and very low down and cramped footwell is my memories. I personally thought I was going as best as my ability and courage could go. Comparing it to these Sims we play hmm they all have their likenesses. I felt quite similar to the fgulf in pcars, with constant grip. Notice low speed grip is easier than rf2. But all the feelings and forces I got through that car you just can't replicate through a plastic wheel, no matter how real tyre physics or whatever says. You just get more feeling and sensations of what's going on in real life. That's what probably makes real life slightly more forgiving

I'm a bit aching now lol so ill end here.
 
Was going to ask how your muscles feel Mosport then read our last line. bet your calves will be sore tomorrow . Gives you an appreciation for how fit the f1/Indy/any high speed car guys are doesn't it.
 
Exactly, real-life is more forgiving because we can feel so much more and so much earlier. Also, we don't push the cars so much on their limits like in sims. (Generally speaking that is, obviously nothing is perfect and every sim may have occasional situations where the physics themselves are less forgiving than real-life).
 
I just had to put on the f2 on rf2 while the memory if the real thing is fresh in my mind.
I was more confident in the real thing than I am in rf2 (even at the same speeds I was getting to today).. Also the natural feel/friction of the tyres turning on tarmac need to be much heavier.. (im at 1.0ffb)

I still thin krf2 has a problem with low speed grip its just not how it is in my experience.. Im not claiming to know everything but RF2 version of the same car, is harder to drive than in reallife at low speeds.(even times when I thought I was goona spin but the car kept grippi9ng) pcars does this better at low speed and with more realistic and heavier ffb. For some reason the fgulf in pcars is hard to spin up, the cformula car represents nearer I thought real life grip traction levels..

Maybe the contact patch can fix this low speed grip loss issue. I hope so.

sorry for my tired writing but now im off to bed, and dream of being a real race driver lol
 
Last edited:
Yup, that's why it's glorious to have wheels capable of as much torque as the real thing, or at least more than the puny mainstream wheels. That's why an OpenSimWheel is amazing. 30Nm of torque should cover most cars in most situations if looking for a 1:1 representation of the real thing :)
 
that is true spin.. I think pcars then manages a better job at replicating real FFB in a small range then.

in rf2 is there a way to make the ffb not so loose.and much more heavier without making the effects heavier?
 
I think you can lower the steering torque sensitivity in your controller file. I think this makes the steering load up a lot sooner, but of course that can introduce clipping sooner as well. Give it a shot :)

There aren't nearly as much FFB tuning options in RF2 as there are in RF1 (including SCE, FT, etc.), R3E, and PC as RF2 pretty much just goes by the real forces only and whatever those forces are, well, that's what they are. So it's quite limited in that sense (but on the other hand, that's technically the only real way to do it).

Basically, the STS (steering torque sensitivity) is just like the sensitivity in the controls section for your pedals or your steering. I think the numbers are reversed though. So the lower the number, the more earlier you'll get the FFB increase.

You should post in the FFB thread, there are a lot more knowledgable guys around here than me. If I remember correctly, Paul Loatman, DrR1pper, and Speed1 just to name a few.
 
msportdan said:
that is true spin.. I think pcars then manages a better job at replicating real FFB in a small range then.

in rf2 is there a way to make the ffb not so loose.and much more heavier without making the effects heavier?
Click to expand...

It's not possible to do much other than changing FFB multiplier. Even if you were able to only increase torque not effects, you would end up with FFB clipping in high speeds. For formula type race cars rF2 FFB typically outputs around 100% force in high speeds and about 50% or less force in low speed corners, which is realistic. If you add much higher multiplier it will be something like 100% in all speeds, which is not realistic and what pCars is doing probably. Main issue is wheel not having enough torque, especially if you drive with old tech FFB engines as in G25/G27.
 
Last edited:
stonec said:
It's not possible to do much other than changing FFB multiplier. Even if you were able to only increase torque not effects, you would end up with FFB clipping in high speeds. For formula type race cars rF2 FFB typically outputs around 100% force in high speeds and about 50% or less force in low speed corners, which is realistic. If you add much higher multiplier it will be something like 100% in all speeds, which is not realistic and what pCars is doing probably. Main issue is wheel not having enough torque, especially if you drive with old tech FFB engines as in G25/G27.
Click to expand...

Yeah, and that's what gives it that "realer" feeling. I noticed it in AC, and then when I enabled the pedal overlay thing, I saw it was clipping red as soon as I turned the wheel.

For running on a low end wheel (G25 here), you just need to readjust yourself to the car if you want to keep the dynamic range to the FFB. I like being able to feel the changes in the FFB as I'm loading and unloading the front. Rather than feel one big overpowering springlike force.
As far as I can see, just play with the minimum force value and the FFB multiplier, that should give a similar feeling if you like that kind of wheel feel.

BTW Dan, not sure if you went and ran the F2 in rF2, but I'm pretty sure its a Williams Formula 2 car, not a Renault. That thing has some crazy caster settings IRL which give it that light feeling through low end wheels
 
Minibull said:
BTW Dan, not sure if you went and ran the F2 in rF2, but I'm pretty sure its a Williams Formula 2 car, not a Renault.
Click to expand...
I think Dan meant Formula Renault 2.0. It's an F2000. Correct me if I'm wrong, Dan.

EDIT: Ok I think I misunderstood your post, Minibull, lol. Ya Dan, the Williams F2 is a complete different animal than the FR2.0. The F2 probably has 2 or 2.5 times the power and grip of a FR2.0.
 
yeah sorry of course... The bodyshape looks similar.. heres me

4hshah.jpg


its an actual race team who run experiences, so the car is full competition and race spec, in fact that car successfully competed in a season last year.

http://swbmotorsport.co.uk/about-swb-motorsport

imo the wheel needs to feel much heavier,,,in rf2 is not like how it feels irl at all.. it almost feels toyish, on my t300.
 
Last edited:
At what point will it not feel toylike? When you have a servo driven beast like a bodnar that can 1:1 match reality to wheel output...
So the options are to stick with the default system of dynamic range in the ffb, or tweak the settings for heavier feel. Whatever works, that's why it's always tweakable.

I know that when I played with the settings, I could get the ffb to be rather like ac. Very heavy and direct feeling to me.
 
lol, wow this guy has you fellas wrapped around his finger. What's next, confusing an F1 car with a formula skip. They both have formula in the name. This place is usually worth a chuckle at least.
 
don't be a d**k, im just comparing my experience yesterday with rf2... I feel the steering needs more weight, other sims manage the ffb better on lower end wheel... what else is there to say..
 
Last edited:
Spinelli said:
I got it in my mind, and there's no need to talk like that. I know it's not right, I've said it like 20 times that I know it's not right and technically speaking the U.I. could get cut off. I know, I know, I know, lol, I've said it like 10 times. But nothing FUNCTIONAL ends up getting cut off, even before. No text, no buttons, nothing. I use a very similar amount of bezel compensation as you do (about 6000x1080) and , again, nothing in my U.I. was ever cut off (besides 1 or 2 digits of the FPS counter), no text, no buttons in the garage screen, not the options screen, nothing.

I fully agree with you and everyone else that - of course - it would be nice/better to have full triple screen options like IR, AC, etc. I completely agree with you and everyone on that :), don't get me wrong. All I'm saying though is that even with 6000 x 1080 bezel compensation, no part of my game is unusable or hidden, even before UI scaling, even in RF1 5 years ago, etc. and therefore the current setup with limited options still works excellent, it's just that people need to angle their monitors the way their setup requires them too, rather than being able to enter in their angles and have the game change according to that.
Click to expand...

Samsung PX2370, ASUS VG248QE, BenQ XL2720T = "6000x1080 (bezel corrected)" = your hardware > Your previous statemet : "1:1 with real-life FOV ,realistic in-game FOV" > Your statemet : "I'm saying though is that even with 6000 x 1080 bezel compensation, no part of my game is unusable or hidden, even before UI scaling, even in RF1 5 years ago, etc. and therefore the current setup with limited options still works excellent, it's just that people need to angle their monitors the way their setup requires them too, rather than being able to enter in their angles and have the game change according to that."

What is right in your statements? ---- Yes User Interface as you state is fine.

What is wrong in your statements? ----- with your hardware and bezel correction, there is NO 1:1 real-life FOV or realistic in-game FOV and current setup with limited options DONT work excellent(wrong scaling), it's NOT just that people need to angle their monitors the way their setup requires them too, rather than being able to enter in their angles and have the game change according to that, why? Scaling is wrong (+-%5) with your hardware and bezel correction.

ISI devs are also reading forums and when they debate what is high and low priority development your statements and stubbornness is hurtful to development of rFactor2 Multiview. Sometimes it is wise to think a bit before throwing you over your keyboard.

You have played rFactor1 5years with NO 1:1 real-life FOV or realistic in-game FOV maybe it is time to you to get real with updated multiview and the correct scaling.

Have nice weekend, enjoy you triples, if you miss the apex now you the reason to that, don't blame you setups, unrealistic ffb , car , etc :)
 
Last edited:
msportdan said:
don't be a d**k, im just comparing my experience yesterday with rf2... I feel the steering needs more weight, other sims manage the ffb better on lower end wheel... what else is there to say..
Click to expand...

Because other games fake it. If steering torque in real life is 50% of max in low speed corners, why should rF2 FFB output 100% all the time? I agree this F2 car is a bit special in FFB, it's probably something with casters, but it's the only car in rF2 I felt FFB was a bit wrong.
 
WhiteShadow said:
Samsung PX2370, ASUS VG248QE, BenQ XL2720T = "6000x1080 (bezel corrected)" = your hardware > Your previous statemet : "1:1 with real-life FOV ,realistic in-game FOV" > Your statemet : "I'm saying though is that even with 6000 x 1080 bezel compensation, no part of my game is unusable or hidden, even before UI scaling, even in RF1 5 years ago, etc. and therefore the current setup with limited options still works excellent, it's just that people need to angle their monitors the way their setup requires them too, rather than being able to enter in their angles and have the game change according to that."

What is right in your statements? ---- Yes User Interface as you state is fine.

What is wrong in your statements? ----- with your hardware and bezel correction, there is NO 1:1 real-life FOV or realistic in-game FOV and current setup with limited options DONT work excellent(wrong scaling), it's NOT just that people need to angle their monitors the way their setup requires them too, rather than being able to enter in their angles and have the game change according to that, why? Scaling is wrong (+-%5) with your hardware and bezel correction.

ISI devs are also reading forums and when they debate what is high and low priority development your statements and stubbornness is hurtful to development of rFactor2 Multiview. Sometimes it is wise to think a bit before throwing you over your keyboard.

You have played rFactor1 5years with NO 1:1 real-life FOV or realistic in-game FOV maybe it is time to you to get real with updated multiview and the correct scaling.

Have nice weekend, enjoy you triples, if you miss the apex now you the reason to that, don't blame you setups, unrealistic ffb , car , etc :)
Click to expand...
What??? Whether my graphics card does bezel compensation or the game does it, in the end it's still done somewhere. I am using a 1:1 with real-life FOV according to a FOV calculator. How does adding bezel compensation not allow me to use a 1:1 real-life FOV? Bezel compensation is just kind of like rendering the image that would other wise be there if your bezels weren't there instead so the actual image of what we see is compensated for to make up for those bezels. Nothing is distorted or the wrong size or anything.

WhiteShadow said:
with your hardware and bezel correction, there is NO 1:1 real-life FOV or realistic in-game FOV and current setup with limited options DONT work excellent(wrong scaling)
Click to expand...
What do you mean with my hardware and bezel correction there cannot be 1:1 scaling??????? You can have 1:1 scaling with any hardware. Use a FOV calculator to find out what that value is for your given setup

WhiteShadow said:
your statements and stubbornness is hurtful to development of rFactor2 Multiview.
Click to expand...
I said that RF2 doesn't have the nice customizability options as some other sims. I also said that none of functional/usable part of the U.I. (menus, text, buttons, etc.) get cut off even with bezel compensation at around 6000x1080. I said that once you have the screens lined up, the game then looks great and no different than any other game with multiview. How is that being stubborn?

WhiteShadow said:
Sometimes it is wise to think a bit before throwing you over your keyboard.
Click to expand...
Right...I do think about what you're saying. If anyone sounds like they have attitude, it's you.

WhiteShadow said:
You have played rFactor1 5years with NO 1:1 real-life FOV or realistic in-game FOV maybe it is time to you to get real with updated multiview and the correct scaling.
Click to expand...
Ok???


If there's something I'm not understanding, perhaps your or someone else can try to explain to me.
 
Last edited:
Whats about pCars? :D

Does anyone found the file, where the steerings settings where stored?
 
maybe stonec.. I just tried the cobra and seemed more what it should.. so best not to mess with the torque as I will screw most cars for the sake of one.

Cant wait for the CMP to be applied to the formula cars!!
 
msportdan said:
maybe stonec.. I just tried the cobra and seemed more what it should.. so best not to mess with the torque as I will screw most cars for the sake of one.

Cant wait for the CMP to be applied to the formula cars!!
Click to expand...

The car specific ffb is exactly that, car specific.
 
its not that I want to raise. its the weight of the wheel.. Theres obviously a problem with the formula cars because they all feel too light ... Most other cars seem fine.

Im happy with the strength of effects.. I don't want to raise that anymore.
 
Look if you guys gonna be rude and just make me feel like crap, because lets face it rf2 isn't perfect and there's things other Sims do better regardless how high you praise or think rf is realistic. All I came on here is to give my input in some elements of rf that need addressing. But obviously no one cares about anyone else's opinion who slightly goes against the elitist views of rf2

So look I'm done here.

You all obviously think rf2 is flipping perfect so what else is there to fix. Other Sims give just as much fun and realism as rf2 does, feel sorry for you who cant see that.

Dan
 
you completely miss the point that you have a range of ffb which can be applied to your toywheel. and you a have a maximum output on force on this toy. do you really believe your wheel should turn stronger when you start out of the garage and in slow speed corners? because we are driving a sim and EVERYBODY goes to the limit of the car way to fast and would never do some stuff in rl because there is always a percentage of chance you are going to die. but what i mean is that you should adjust yourself to your hardware. because if your wheel would turn stronger for lets say 40% at the start you would miss 40% of force in turns around 150kmh+ where the steering gets loaded with downforce. you cannot expect a real life experience with such simple hardware its impossible. if you would buy a wheel which can afford a lot of torque you would think completely different about that. because you would get the real force for slow turns and also the force would go up to a certain point where you gonna struggle to turn the wheel. its the same everywhere, if you start to drive in a clio cup or something else you don't have the same experience with downforce like a guy who drives in an gp2 car. and all you can do for your racing is to get used to your hardware. sorry for spelling mistakes worked 27 days in a row and iam drunk as hell right now ;)
 
msportdan said:
Look if you guys gonna be rude and just make me feel like crap, because lets face it rf2 isn't perfect and there's things other Sims do better regardless how high you praise or think rf is realistic. All I came on here is to give my input in some elements of rf that need addressing. But obviously no one cares about anyone else's opinion who slightly goes against the elitist views of rf2

So look I'm done here.

You all obviously think rf2 is flipping perfect so what else is there to fix. Other Sims give just as much fun and realism as rf2 does, feel sorry for you who cant see that.

Dan
Click to expand...

I don't know whether you're going to look in here again Dan, but for what it's worth - I agree with what you say: the F2 Williams car's FFB is all out of kilter for me too - always has been - just no feedback to speak of at slow speeds & all around the "straight ahead" position.

And the tin-tops and all the other non-Formula cars are just fine for me too..

Great pic you posted of your real-life driving - I too have felt more confident in real open wheelers at trackdays - at slow speed corners anyway, but at fast corners (I'm thinking round the back of Thruxton) I'm sh*tting myself!!)
 
Yeah Dan I guess your comments just rub some people the wrong way sometimes. That's just how it is, you shouldn't take it too personally. You're allowed your opinion of course.

Let me just say I'm green in the face of envy that you got to drive a formula car! Wow that's one of my biggest dreams, to feel what that's like. How much could you feel through the wheel? What was the sensation like?

Cheers
 
Hex it was one of the beat experiences of my life. My first thoughts

- hey its tight in here my ankles are touching each other.
- wow where the brake, the pedals are almost on top of each other
- the gearstick is pushed against my thigh and its a hard pull to engage
- the acceleration!! Pushed back into the seat feel but belts ai tight u don't move much.
- bloody hell the grip!!! I mean wow
- steerings heavy at slow speeds and lightens up faster you go. Suppose momentum of the tyres going forward makes Turning easier.
- confidence with the car I had was amazing I just could feel every feeling thru my bum and the wheel.
- the feeling thru the wheel is like a heavily dampered feel. Not as notchy as rf2
- out braked myself and went off all the stones stuck to the wheels and as I got off again the stones were hitting my visor. Don't get that in a game.
- the energy and fitness you need I did 20 laps and I struggles to get out of car at the end I was knackered
- the braking it stops In instant!
- I locked up the inside left front going into a slow left corner. Didn't flatspot easily. Very skittish under braking.

m7giky.jpg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top